comprehension of informational text by …d-scholarship.pitt.edu/32605/1/driver...
TRANSCRIPT
COMPREHENSION OF INFORMATIONAL TEXT BY KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS:
ACTION RESEARCH OF REPEATED READ-ALOUDS OF INFORMATIONAL TEXT
WITHIN A UNIT
by
Tracy Bell Driver
B.S., Bucknell University, 1996
M. Ed., University of Pittsburgh, 2004
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
the School of Education in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
University of Pittsburgh
2017
ii
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
This dissertation was presented
by
Tracy B. Driver
It was defended on
April 18, 2017
and approved by
Maria Genest, EdD, LaRoche College
Katrina Bartow Jacobs, PhD, Instruction and Learning
Dissertation Advisor: Patricia Crawford, PhD, Instruction and Learning
iii
Copyright © by Tracy B. Driver
2017
iv
COMPREHENSION OF INFORMATIONAL TEXT BY KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS:
ACTION RESEARCH OF REPEATED READ-ALOUDS OF INFORMATIONAL TEXT
WITHIN A UNIT
Tracy B. Driver, EdD
University of Pittsburgh
In the current educational climate, kindergarten students are expected to be proficient at highly
academic tasks. One such task is the comprehension of informational text. The purpose of this
study was to investigate how teachers can support kindergarteners’ comprehension of
informational text through the use of repeated read-alouds within a unit. One intact kindergarten
class of 25 students engaged in a two-week unit on the topic of bats, including interactive read-
alouds of informational and narrative texts with repeated readings of two primary texts. Through
observation of the read-aloud events, multiple choice assessments of content, and interviews with
select students, I investigated how kindergarteners in this primary school engaged in learning
from and comprehending informational text in the context of interactive read-alouds. In
addition, I investigated how students in this class demonstrated acquisition and retention of the
concepts presented in an informational text that is shared through an interactive read-aloud and
what effect repeated readings of a text had on their comprehension. Findings indicated that the
students in this kindergarten class utilized a variety of actions to access the text within the
sociocultural context of the interactive read-aloud and were able to demonstrate comprehension
of the text after the interactive read-aloud. Furthermore, repeated readings of the text resulted in
increased acquisition and retention of concepts from the text. These results have implications for
classroom practice as well as teacher preparation and professional development in the area of
promoting comprehension of informational text by young students.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ..................................................................................................................................... X
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1
1.1 PROBLEM AREA ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 PROBLEM OF PRACTICE ............................................................................... 3
1.3 LINES OF INQUIRY .......................................................................................... 4
1.4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 5
1.5 OVERVIEW OF STUDY .................................................................................... 8
2.0 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................................... 10
2.1 HISTORY OF KINDERGARTEN .................................................................. 10
2.2 READ-ALOUDS ................................................................................................ 13
2.3 INFORMATIONAL TEXT IN PRIMARY GRADES ................................... 17
3.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................. 22
3.1 METHODS OVERVIEW ................................................................................. 22
3.1.1 Student ............................................................................................................ 22
3.1.2 Text ................................................................................................................. 24
3.1.3 Activity ............................................................................................................ 25
3.2 PARTICIPANTS ............................................................................................... 28
4.0 FINDINGS .................................................................................................................. 31
vi
4.1 OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................... 31
4.2 RESEARCH QUESTION 1 .............................................................................. 32
4.2.1 Answering teacher questions ........................................................................ 33
4.2.2 Connecting to prior knowledge .................................................................... 37
4.2.3 Responding to classmates .............................................................................. 40
4.2.4 Using visual aids............................................................................................. 44
4.2.5 Asking questions ............................................................................................ 46
4.2.6 Responding chorally ...................................................................................... 47
4.2.7 Acting out the text.......................................................................................... 48
4.2.8 Making predictions ........................................................................................ 49
4.2.9 Summary ........................................................................................................ 50
4.3 RESEARCH QUESTION 2 .............................................................................. 51
4.3.1 Pre-test ............................................................................................................ 51
4.3.2 Whole group multiple-choice assessment .................................................... 52
4.3.3 Interviews ....................................................................................................... 52
4.3.4 Summary ........................................................................................................ 56
4.4 RESEARCH QUESTION 3 .............................................................................. 57
4.4.1 Whole group multiple choice assessment .................................................... 58
4.4.2 Interviews ....................................................................................................... 59
4.4.3 Summary ........................................................................................................ 63
4.5 SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 64
5.0 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................. 66
5.1 MAJOR FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS .................................................... 66
vii
5.1.1 Major findings................................................................................................ 66
5.1.2 Limitations ..................................................................................................... 68
5.2 IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................... 69
5.2.1 Classroom Practice ........................................................................................ 69
5.2.2 Future Lines of inquiry ................................................................................. 71
APPENDIX A .............................................................................................................................. 73
APPENDIX B .............................................................................................................................. 79
APPENDIX C .............................................................................................................................. 84
APPENDIX D .............................................................................................................................. 87
BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................... 88
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Reading Survey Scoring ................................................................................................. 23
Table 2. Unit goals ........................................................................................................................ 26
Table 3. Unit plan ......................................................................................................................... 27
Table 4. Levels of questioning .................................................................................................... 33
Table 5. Scores from interview assessments ................................................................................ 59
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. A Heuristic for Thinking About Reading Comprehension (RRSG, 2002, p. xiv) .......... 6
x
PREFACE
I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Patricia Crawford for her guidance and support throughout
the EdD program. I am especially grateful for the opportunities to collaborate on writing and for
her consistently kind and valuable feedback.
In addition, I would like to thank my dissertation committee members, Dr. Maria Genest
and Dr. Katrina Bartow Jacobs for helping me to shape this study. I appreciate the time they
have put in to help me complete this quest.
I would also like to thank Dr. Linda Kucan, coordinator of the Language, Literacy, and
Culture ARCO. The chances we were given to learn from critical readings and theoretical
perspectives were invaluable. I also appreciate the many opportunities develop my skills as a
writer.
This work is dedicated to my three children, Holden, Jonah, and Kathryn who inspire me
in all I do. I am looking forward to having more time to spend with the three of you now.
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROBLEM AREA
The changes in kindergarten programming in the United States have made it necessary for
students to demonstrate comprehension of informational text at this young age. Their struggle
with this task has been influenced by exposure to informational text and read-aloud practices
(Duke, 2000; McKeown & Beck, 2003; Yopp & Yopp, 2006).
Kindergarten has evolved from an introduction to school focusing on spiritual and moral
development to a fast-paced academic year (Bassok, Latham, & Rorem, 2016; Russell, 2011).
For some time, early childhood programming, rich in phonics instruction, has allowed students to
begin decoding text in the early grades. However, comprehension instruction was neglected; this
practice can no longer continue (Durkin, 1978). In 2010, the National Governors Association
Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers published the Common Core
State Standards, partially as a response to what was seen as insufficient progress toward NCLB
goals (National Governors Association, 2010). These standards represented a considerable
change from previous state standards and sought to “establish a consensus on expectations for
student knowledge and skills that should be developed in Grades K-12” (Porter, McMaken,
Hwang, & Yang, 2011, p. 103). Adoption of the standards was left to state legislatures. In
Pennsylvania, The State Board of Education took recommendations from a committee of
2
educators in order to create a more rigorous set of standards. (Porter et al., 2011) The PA Core
Standards were adopted in 2014, and kindergarten students are being held accountable for eleven
standards related to reading informational text, including identifying main idea and supporting
details and making connections. Because students are developing early literacy skills, this
comprehension work is best addressed in the context of a read aloud. Read-alouds are a way for
students to gain access to content and grapple with text that they would not have encountered
otherwise. Although students are not reading the texts themselves, listening comprehension
contributes in a significant and positive way to reading comprehension (Kraemer, McCabe, &
Sinatra, 2012).
While reading aloud has traditionally been a focus and key practice in kindergarten,
teachers overwhelmingly use narrative texts for this activity (Yopp & Yopp, 2006).
Comprehension of informational text in particular may be affected by the limited amount of
informational text that students encounter in the early grades (Duke, 2000; Hall, Sabey, &
McClellan, 2005). This lack of exposure to and transaction with informational texts in the early
grades has been offered as explanation for the “fourth grade slump” (Donovan & Smolkin, 2002;
Kraemer et al., 2012), a phenomenon whereby students who seem to be suitably developing as
readers begin to struggle when confronted with content area reading in fourth grade. Limiting
exposure to diverse informational and other text formats in favor of narrative texts causes
students to overgeneralize story grammar to all texts. Experience with expository formats is
necessary to broaden student understanding of text structure (Duke & Bennett-Armistead, 2013).
The typical format of the read aloud activity has also influenced students’ ability to
construct meaning from text. The teacher centered and directed IRE (Initiate – Respond –
Evaluate) format has been the traditional approach to questioning associated with read-alouds,
3
and still persists in classrooms today (Hoffman, 2011; Varelas & Pappas, 2006). With the IRE
approach, the teacher controls the conversation, leaving few opportunities for extended responses
by students. With controlled questions and “correct” responses, there are also not opportunities
for the students to engage in inquiry and construct meaning from the text. Dickinson and Smith
(1994) found that analytical discussion during reading improved student comprehension. In these
types of discussions, students had to consider the content and language of what was read
throughout the read-aloud. Despite this finding, which has been upheld by other studies,
McKeown and Beck (2003) discovered that teachers were not actually using this type of
discussion in their classrooms.
1.2 PROBLEM OF PRACTICE
For my problem of practice, I investigated how a teacher in one specific classroom can support
kindergarteners’ comprehension of informational text. In the past, comprehension instruction
was often reserved for the upper primary and intermediate grades, with kindergarten and even
first grade focusing almost exclusively on developing the foundational skills necessary for
decoding words. However, “a focus on comprehension is desirable from the very beginning of
reading instruction” (RAND, 2002, p. 5), and postponing comprehension instruction results in
missed early learning opportunities. For kindergarten students, this comprehension work can be
done in the context of a read-aloud. Read-alouds are a way for students to gain access to content
and grapple with text that they would not encounter otherwise. The traditional read aloud format
includes reading a story followed by questions requiring recall of information. However, the
most effective way to increase student comprehension is to actively construct meaning together
4
(Wiseman, 2011) as students and teachers do when they engage in interactive read-alouds, rather
than focusing on merely isolated skills or simple recall. An interactive read-aloud is a classroom
event that provides students with the opportunity to respond to open ended questions throughout
the reading. Although the teacher provides the reading, both peers and the teacher may scaffold
comprehension through meaningful dialogue (Wiseman, 2011).
A curriculum that engages kindergarten students in comprehending an informational text
that is the focus of an interactive read-aloud must take into account: (a) students’ abilities,
relevant knowledge and experiences, as well as interests, (b) texts that offer opportunities at
learning, and (c) activities before, during, and after reading that support engagement at a more
than superficial level (RAND, 2002). Using this framework, I designed and implemented a unit
including whole group read-aloud sessions in the classroom setting.
1.3 LINES OF INQUIRY
This study investigated the process and outcomes of comprehension when kindergarteners
engage in interactive read-alouds with their teacher and classmates. In addition, I investigated
the effect of multiple readings of the same text on the learning of these students. The following
questions were addressed:
(a) How do kindergarteners in this primary school engage in learning from and
comprehending informational text in the context of interactive read-alouds?
(b) How do students in this class demonstrate acquisition and retention of the concepts
presented in an informational text that is shared through an interactive read-aloud?
5
(c) In what ways do repeated readings of an informational text influence acquisition and
retention of concepts presented in the text for this class of kindergarten students?
1.4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
As a framework for thinking about comprehension and effective comprehension instruction, I
turned to the RAND Reading Study Group’s 2002 report. This group of fourteen experts in the
field of reading was tasked with developing recommendations for a plan of research and
development for comprehension instruction. With traditional comprehension instruction,
teachers were typically expected to simply follow the instructions in the basal manual (Durkin,
1978). After students read the text, teachers initiated a question to which a student gave a
response that the teacher then evaluated. If an incorrect answer was given, another student was
selected until the correct response was provided. This IRE approach, which does not promote
the development of critical thinking skills needed for comprehension, has also traditionally been
used in read-aloud events. By its nature, this format limits discussion and puts control of the
event squarely in the hands of the teacher.
In contrast to this approach, the RAND Reading Study Group developed a definition of
comprehension and a heuristic for thinking about ways to implement instruction in this area. The
RAND Reading Study Group defines comprehension as “the process of simultaneously
extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language”
(p. 11). Three elements, the reader, the text, and the activity, interact to produce comprehension.
These essential components interact with each other within the larger sociocultural context
(Figure 1). The classroom itself is a social context, built through language and social practice
6
where children take on a new role, as “student” (Packer & Goicoechea, 2000). This is
particularly true for kindergarten students who may be experiencing formal schooling for the
first time. Students are also participants in social contexts outside of the school that influence
their background knowledge and approaches to learning.
Figure 1. A Heuristic for Thinking About Reading Comprehension (RRSG, 2002, p. xiv)
Within this sociocultural context, the heuristic argues for the need to consider the reader
(or listener in the case of kindergarten), text, and activity when planning comprehension
instruction. In the case of the reader, cognitive abilities, motivation and interest, and prior
knowledge and experiences can all influence comprehension. The goal of comprehension
instruction is to not only allow students to comprehend text ideas, but also to develop their
understanding of how text ideas are expressed in language and language patterns. These abilities
also vary among students. I will use the term “student” hereafter, in place of “reader”, as in this
discussion the teacher will be reading the text to the students. The teacher as reader is another
variable, and oral reading style needs to be considered (Brabham & Lynch-Brown, 2002).
7
In the case of the text, there are also several factors to consider. Genre, media form,
content, and vocabulary load are text factors that influence comprehension. Accuracy of
information is paramount in text selection, and the presentation of that information in a way that
allows students to gain access to the concepts is also vital. To ensure accuracy, author
credentials and sources need to be considered. To ensure accessibility, vocabulary complexity
and presentation, sentence construction, and visuals need to be taken into consideration
(Donovan, C. A. & Smolkin, 2002).
The activity related to the reading involves the purpose for the reading, the processing of
the text, and the outcomes of the experience. The purpose can be set prior to reading and may
come from the teacher or be self-selected by the student. For informational texts, learning from
text is a goal. Pre-reading activities can play a significant role in setting the stage for learning
and may include building background knowledge and introducing vocabulary or key concepts to
support students in learning from the text content. During reading teachers can support students
in engaging with text ideas through their prompts and questions.
Although the three elements of this heuristic are considered separately, they interact with
each other in complex ways. A curriculum that engages kindergarten students in comprehending
an informational text that is the focus of an interactive read-aloud, for example, must take into
account: (a) students’ abilities, relevant knowledge and experiences, as well as interests, (b) texts
that offer opportunities at learning, and (c) activities before, during, and after reading that
support engagement at a more than superficial level.
8
1.5 OVERVIEW OF STUDY
I used action research as the approach for this inquiry, as the goal was to understand practice
within my own school setting, in order to improve it through developing a plan of action,
implementing it, and observing the results. Reflection on the outcomes of the intervention was
used to plan future action with the students (Herr & Anderson, 2014). The purpose of this study
was to design a unit including repeated interactive read-alouds and to investigate the effects of
these read-alouds on the comprehension of informational text by kindergarten students. I
designed the unit and served as reader in the read-aloud sessions. This was a mixed methods
study of the processes and outcomes of repeated interactive read-alouds of informational texts in
a kindergarten class.
The unit focused on the topic of bats, covering both Next Generation Science Standards
for Kindergarten as well as Pennsylvania Core Standards related to comprehending informational
text. Instruction of the unit took place over the course of two weeks in October, 2016. Prior to
the unit being taught, students took a pre-test to assess prior knowledge and completed a reading
survey to assess attitude toward read-alouds in general, and the subject of bats in particular.
During the unit, a primary text was read on three consecutive days. These interactive read-aloud
sessions were video recorded. After each reading, all students took a brief multiple-choice
assessment to gauge comprehension. Questions were presented to the students on a screen, with
questions and answers read aloud to the students. Answers were recorded using Activotes, a
handheld clicker device. In addition, four students participated in interviews to answer open-
ended questions about the content of the unit and process of comprehension. In addition to the
primary text, a second informational text and one narrative text were read a single time each
9
week. Although no assessments were given, the informational text read-aloud sessions were
recorded and analyzed.
10
2.0 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In this chapter I will review the history of kindergarten, exploring the changes that have occurred
in practices leading to current expectations that are placed on kindergarten students and teachers
today. The role of the Common Core State Standards is significant in this discussion. I will also
explore the role of read-alouds in classroom practice and how different approaches to read-
alouds have been shown to result in different outcomes in relation to comprehension. Finally, I
will explore the role of informational texts in primary grades. Specifically, I will examine
reasons that narrative texts have dominated primary classrooms and the effect this has had on
comprehension of informational texts.
2.1 HISTORY OF KINDERGARTEN
Russell (2011) describes the metamorphosis that kindergarten in the United States has undergone
since its inception. In the mid-1800’s kindergarten was an introduction to learning without
traditional academic subjects. Following Friederich Froebel’s model, the focus of learning was
on spiritual and moral development. Later, in the midst of the early 20th century progressive and
child study movements, reformers such as Patty Smith Hill helped to shift the focus of
kindergarten learning to a child development perspective. Learning often occurred through play
and activities based on the child’s interests (Hill, 1908; Rudnitski, 1995). Although experimental
11
kindergartens that focused on academics were introduced in the 1960’s and 70’s, most still had a
developmental orientation. It was at this time that Dolores Durkin (1974-75) completed her
study of children in a pre-school program designed to investigate the effects of early literacy
instruction on future reading achievement. At the time of her study, preschool was not
widespread and many parents believed four-year-olds should be home with their mothers. The
kindergarten program that existed in the district where her study took place focused on
socialization and the arts. During the first year of her study, a reading readiness component of
the curriculum was not taught until first grade. The debate about appropriate early reading
instruction ensued, and in many ways, continues to this day (Pressley & Allington, 2014).
Pearson (1985) describes typical early reading instruction occurring in the mid 1980’s.
Commercial reading programs taught phonics early and with intensity. The alphabet was also
taught early, often in kindergarten readiness programs. The focus was on specific skills that
were tested at the end of each unit, and practice materials were completed independently. This
attention to phonics instruction was supported by research that was available at the time, but not
at the expense of comprehension work. Jeanne Chall (1989), a proponent of systematic, explicit
phonics instruction also noted the importance of authentic literature and writing in a complete
language arts curriculum. Nevertheless, the results of kindergarten reading instruction met
educators’ expectations in that students were successful on phonics assessments. Although
students learned these early decoding skills, after third grade some began to exhibit
comprehension difficulties. Durkin (1978-79) found that comprehension was not taught at all
in primary grades, and what was called instruction in the intermediate grades was actually
assessment. She observed that after students read the text, teachers initiated a question to which
a student gave a response that the teacher then evaluated. If an incorrect answer was given,
12
another student was selected until the correct response was provided. This is known as an IRE
(Initiate-Response-Evaluate) approach. Teachers generally followed the instructions in the basal
manual, which provided these questions.
The 1990’s “Standards movement” introduced increasingly rigorous academic standards
for kindergarten, and according to Russell (2011), “standardized testing and accountability have
contributed to the intensification of academic practices” (p. 237). By 2000, schools had
implemented formal curricula including reading and math skills. In other words, kindergarten
became the new first grade. Evidence suggests that teachers increasingly focus on academics at
the expense of social skills and play. Federal policies such as No Child Left Behind (2002) and
Reading First brought focus to early literacy, but caused schools to significantly increase
instructional time for literacy at the expense of content areas. Pressure has been placed on
teachers to have students master academic skills at an early age (Hoffman, Collins, &
Schickedanz, 2015). How might this impact future reading achievement and comprehension
development? Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, and Monro (2007) suggest that this loss of attention to
play and social development may in fact be detrimental, as dramatic play can be used to develop
executive function skills such as self-discipline and cognitive flexibility which could be more
beneficial to later success in school and life than early academic skills. The National Association
for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC, 2009) cautions that “standards overload” (p. 4)
can have negative effects on young children. High-pressure classrooms don’t foster a love of
learning, offer invitations for risk-taking, or offer opportunities for children to develop a sense of
competence and ability. That being said, rigorous academic standards are not necessarily in
opposition to developmentally appropriate practices, as recommended by NAEYC. These
standards need to be implemented in a caring classroom community where children are actively
13
engaged with opportunities to interact with the teacher and their peers. One example of
developmentally appropriate practice is the read-aloud event.
2.2 READ-ALOUDS
Teachers and parents have always read stories to small children and research has shown that
there are many positive benefits associated with this activity (Beck & McKeown, 2001; Carter &
Abrahamson,1991; Hoffman, 2011; Neugbauer & Curie-Rubin, 2009). However, the nature of
read-alouds, and the understanding of how they can be used effectively in the classroom has
changed dramatically over the past several decades. When Durkin (1974-75) completed her
study, she noted that there was a story time in kindergarten, but this reading was unrelated to any
comprehension instruction. In the late 1970’s telling children to listen carefully and then asking
questions afterward was considered instruction (Cassiddy & Vukelich, 1977). Since that time,
the importance of setting a purpose for reading has been acknowledged. Pearson (1985)
highlights research that shows asking questions that activate relevant background knowledge and
predicting what will happen prior to reading results in better comprehension. Purpose setting
questions that are maintained throughout the reading are posed to the students. Post reading,
these questions are revisited. As discussed previously, the teacher centered and directed IRE
format has been the traditional approach to questioning associated with read-alouds and still
persists in classrooms today (Hoffman, 2011; Lennox, 2011; Varelas & Pappas, 2006). With the
IRE approach, the teacher controls the conversation, leaving few opportunities for extended
responses by students. With controlled questions and “correct” responses, there are also not
opportunities for the students to construct meaning from the text. Deep understanding does not
14
take place, and many of these discussions last fewer than five minutes (Brabham and Lynch-
Brown, 2002).
Dickinson and Smith (1994) found that analytical discussion during reading improved
student comprehension. In these types of discussions, students had to consider the content and
language of what was read throughout the read-aloud. The teachers and students worked
together to build comprehension. Despite evidence that allowing students to coconstruct
meaning results in improved comprehension, McKeown and Beck (2003) discovered that
teachers were not actually using this type of discussion in their classrooms. In response, they
developed Text Talk, a read aloud program to engage students in discussion and prompt response
to decontextualized language. After development, they piloted the program in two first grades in
a low achieving urban elementary school. The study found that students were able to contribute
complex responses to the text and that the program supported children’s vocabulary and
comprehension.
Developing vocabulary knowledge and comprehension skills including inferential
thinking occurs when a quality text is shared by a skillful teacher. Interactive read-alouds
involve modeling and scaffolding in a way that allows children to make connections between
their own experiences and the text (Lennox, 2011).
Brabham and Lynch-Brown (2002) also investigated the effect of an interactive
discussion on the vocabulary and comprehension development of first and third graders. They
compared the gains made by students involved in an interactive discussion to students in groups
that experienced read-alouds with a performance style (that included discussion either before or
after the reading) and “just reading” with no discussion. The students in the interactive
discussion group significantly outperformed the other two in vocabulary development, with the
15
“just reading” group producing the lowest scores. A significant difference in comprehension
scores was not found, which the authors speculate is the result of the stance taken by the teachers
during the read-aloud. Rosenblatt (1982) asserts that when readers engage in a reading event
they adopt a stance, or mental set based on the purpose for reading. This stance is positioned on
a continuum from efferent to an aesthetic. An efferent stance is used when the goal is to take
information away from the text. An aesthetic stance is taken when reading a story to make a
personal connection and produce an emotional response. It is not the text itself that is somewhere
on the efferent to aesthetic continuum, but rather the purpose that the reader sets. The efferent
stance taken by the reader during the interactive discussion that led to vocabulary development
interrupted the flow of the story, and thus did not produce significant comprehension gains,
although they also note that comprehension was not hindered. There could be an indirect
influence on comprehension, as increasing vocabulary benefits students with future
comprehension tasks. Furthermore, while taking an aesthetic stance may allow students to
experience the flow of a narrative and better experience the whole text, it would not be
appropriate for improving comprehension of informational text.
In many parts of the world, telling and reading stories to children is an important part of
early literacy development. In Calca, Peru, Neugbauer and Curie-Rubin (2009) found that the
IRE format of read alouds used in the United States was typical there as well. They implemented
a read aloud program utilizing an interactive read aloud format in two first grade classrooms.
These classroom teachers received professional development on read-aloud pedagogy including
literal and inferential questioning techniques. The students engaged in the interactive read-
alouds outperformed their peers in the control classrooms where the new read aloud format was
not used.
16
Poveda (2003) investigated the use of read-alouds in an urban, multi-ethnic public school
in a working-class neighborhood in Madrid, Spain. As we see in the United States, minority and
low socioeconomic status background students enter school with less familiarity with uses of
literacy. Exposure to books in kindergarten can help ameliorate these effects. Many teachers in
Spain organize read-alouds as part of the daily routine. Interactive text-focused read-alouds that
employ questioning before, during, and after reading are implemented, although whether
questions followed the IRE approach or a more interactive discussion format were not discussed.
In this study, Poveda did not try to assess effective instruction, but rather examined the read
aloud as a social practice. The teacher was working with students with limited book knowledge,
and the teacher saw read-alouds as a chance to formally expose the students to literature.
Although this study reflects the practices of only one teacher, she did exclusively use narrative
texts in her read-alouds, indicating that teachers in Spain may also have a bias toward narrative
text for young students.
Recently, considerations of culturally relevant pedagogy in the context of a read aloud
have been explored (May, 2011; Varelas & Pappas, 2006). These studies refute deficit theories
that suggest students from minority or low-income homes enter school without the background
knowledge that will allow them to be successful in an academic setting. Varelas and Pappas
(2006) conducted their study in an urban school district with first and second graders. While
acknowledging that these students “are not members of a culture of power” and “do not share the
relevant cultural capital” (p.250), the authors saw giving them access to genres of academic
social language and science discourse a matter of social justice. Students gained access by
joining discussions using knowledge from cultural practices that were part of their everyday
lives. Through a multimodal, multiliteracies approach to science instruction that included read-
17
alouds of informational text, the students did demonstrate comprehension and academic
achievement.
May (2011) worked with a similar low-income population, although with slightly older
students (3rd and 4th grade). The teacher in this study was committed to a culturally relevant
pedagogy as seen in her text selection and interactive read-aloud practices. The teacher selected
multicultural literature that avoided Western hegemonic portrayals of different cultural groups.
Students were empowered to participate in interactive read-alouds, and were further validated by
the teacher “animating” them by repeating and affirming their participation. Beyond affirming
the cultural identity of her students, these interactive read alouds were opportunities to teach
content and text features, promote reading skills such as paraphrasing and comprehension, and
draw attention to big ideas. As with many read aloud programs, narrative texts were exclusively
selected.
2.3 INFORMATIONAL TEXT IN PRIMARY GRADES
In primary classrooms, narrative texts are overwhelmingly chosen over informational texts for
read aloud events. Jim Trelease, in The Read-Aloud Handbook (1979) advocated for fiction over
nonfiction for read-alouds because he believed they were more relevant and interesting for
children (Carter & Abrahamson, 1991). However, research indicates that informational texts can
be motivational for some students who don’t like stories but have interest in specific content
(Duke & Bennett-Armistead, 2013; Yopp & Yopp, 2006). Kraemer et al. (2012) reported that a
majority of students in their study preferred informational text.
18
There are many other important reasons why informational text deserves a prominent
place in primary classrooms. Duke and Bennett-Armistead (2013) offer a compelling argument
for the use of informational text with even our youngest learners. First, informational text must
be read in all content areas when these students reach the intermediate grades and beyond. Early
exposure can lay a foundation for this. Outside of school, in society and on the Internet, students
will encounter massive amounts of informational text that they will need to be able to read
critically. These reasons may seem to indicate that the use of informational text is only for future
benefit, but even in the early years, children have a curiosity about the natural and social world
that informational text can help them to explore. It also allows them to develop vocabulary and
literacy skills that are beneficial in the primary grades.
In her landmark 2000 study, Nell Duke found that only 3.6 minutes per day was spent on
informational text instruction in the first grade classrooms that she observed. Even less time (1.9
minutes per day) was spent on informational text in low socio-economic classrooms, which is
concerning, because students from low-income families often have lower academic achievement.
Exposure to the concepts found in informational text is necessary to build much needed human
capital. Lindo (2014) argues that “having lower levels of human capital may serve as the largest
hindrance to the development of reading comprehension skill” (p. 291). Clearly schools have an
obligation to provide experiences to raise these levels. Yopp and Yopp (2006) found that in
classrooms of preschool through third grade, read-alouds were overwhelmingly narrative in
nature. Narrative texts accounted for 74% of the read-alouds reported by the kindergarten
teachers, compared to 9% for informational texts. They argue that this is problematic because
benefits of expository text include providing answers to questions about world and exposure to
specialized vocabulary and different text structures.
19
Some educators feel that young children struggle with expository text because they are
not developmentally ready to handle it. Expository text has in fact been shown to be more
difficult for students to comprehend than narrative text (Lehto & Anttila, 2003). However, the
notion that kindergarten students are not ready for expository text has been refuted by several
studies (Duke & Kays, 1998; Duke & Tower, 2004; Smolkin & Donovan, 2001, 2003; Yopp &
Yopp, 2006). Duke and Kays (1998) asked kindergarten students to “pretend to read” a narrative
book and an expository book in September and again in December. After exposure to
informational text in the form of read-alouds for three months, students were able to incorporate
more characteristics of expository text into their responses. This was true even though a
traditional read-aloud method rather than interactive discussion was used. Furthermore, students
self-selected informational text during independent reading and listening center. Smolkin and
Donovan (2003) also found that students, and boys in particular, were drawn to informational
books.
Lee, Lee, Han, and Schickedanz (2011) did a comparative study of teacher attitudes and
read-aloud practices in the United States and Korea. They found that while preschool teachers in
the United States believe that children enjoy fiction more than nonfiction, teachers in Korea hold
the opposite view. In Korean schools, nonfiction tends to dominate, as the cultural environment
promotes learning facts and concepts over creativity or imagination. The teachers believe that
children prefer nonfiction and are better able to relate the texts to their own world. Korean
classrooms also provide access to more nonfiction books than their U.S. counterpart. Findings
from this study indicate that kindergartens and even preschools in the United States could benefit
from incorporation of more informational text.
20
In advocating for nonfiction in a read-aloud program, Carter and Abrahamson (1991)
suggest beginning with informational narratives or other genres that contain narrative style, such
as real life accounts. “Effective science programs will begin with picture storybooks to create a
love of science and then move to informational texts” (Donovan & Smolkin, 2002, p. 504).
Informational narratives are in fact what Heisey and Kucan (2010) used when they investigated
the use of informational text read-alouds to teach science concepts to first and second grade
students. This study utilized carefully planned questions after small chunks of text. Questions
focused on big ideas, content-specific information, text-to-text connections, and vocabulary.
They found that students who engaged in discussion during reading could better provide text
based information to support their answers and demonstrated more depth of understanding than
students questioned only post-reading. These students had more opportunity to talk about the
text and made better intertextual connections. The three texts used in the study shared similar
themes related to scientific inquiry, and another finding indicated that “multiple exposures to a
related concept across stories afforded students more time to build a mental representation of
important ideas” (p. 675). In other words, students had a deeper understanding of the target
concept after the third reading than they did after the first. Unfortunately, Brabham & Lynch-
Brown (2002) found that embedding read-alouds in a larger unit of study was not a common
practice in the elementary classrooms that they observed.
While informational narratives and even stories can be a valuable component of a reading
program, students also need to become familiar with the features of expository text structures.
Dual purpose texts, such as The Magic School Bus series, provide a running storyline, with facts
presented in diagrams or insets, thereby stretching across two genres. Because of the narrative
component, these books are not classified as expository. Children need to learn that not all texts
21
have characters, settings, and plots. Texts can also describe, sequence, compare and contrast,
explore cause and effect, and explore problem and solution. This can be explicitly taught to
children by using authentic texts, and they can develop a more sophisticated understanding of
text structure from an early age. Children can also become familiar with text features such as
real photographs with captions, charts, graphs, diagrams, and other visuals that can help them to
make sense of the text. The teacher can model how to use these features to deepen
understanding of the concepts being presented and through a gradual release of responsibility
students can begin to use recognize and use these features themselves. Hoffman et al. (2015)
provide compelling evidence that expository text is appropriate for young children. Although
they agree that the narrative structure is preferred for topics related to events, it is not as well
suited for science concept development.
22
3.0 METHODS
3.1 METHODS OVERVIEW
This study employed mixed methods to gather data regarding the process and outcomes of
comprehension work during an interactive read-aloud in a kindergarten classroom. Data was
collected through a survey, observation, pre-test and post-test comparisons, and interviews.
Evidence of processes of comprehension included actions taken by the students in the form of
responses to the teacher, the text, and each other during the read-aloud event. Transcripts of the
interactive read-alouds were analyzed using process analysis. This will be discussed further in
chapter 4. Learning outcomes were measured through student answers to multiple-choice and
open-ended questions about the content of the unit. Statistical analysis of these scores was used
to demonstrate comprehension outcomes.
3.1.1 Student
Consideration of student prior knowledge, interest, and motivation informed this study. A week
prior to the unit of study, students took a 20-point researcher designed multiple-choice
assessment of core unit concepts to assess prior-knowledge. (See Appendix A) In addition, they
completed an interest and motivation survey. (See Appendix B) This survey was adapted from
The Elementary Reading Attitude Survey (ERAS). The ERAS consists of twenty questions on a
23
Likert-like scale, where four pictures of Garfield are used to represent feelings ranging from very
happy to very upset. The questions survey students’ attitudes toward recreational and academic
reading. This survey, which is normed for students in grades 1-6, goes beyond the scope of this
study and is too lengthy for students in the beginning of kindergarten. Questions therefore used
the “Garfield” scale from the survey but targeted listening to stories, informational text in
general, and learning about bats in particular. I scored the attitude survey to determine level of
interest in listening to books in general and the subjects of bats in particular. As per the ERAS
directions, each item was scored on a 4-point scale with the leftmost (happiest) Garfield counting
for 4-points. See Table 1 for choices and corresponding point values.
Table 1. Reading Survey Scoring
4 points 3 points 2 points 1 point
To interpret the scores, I could not use the norms provided. However, I was able to tell
relative interest by comparing scores among students. I was also able to informally note where
scores fell on the scale as a whole class. The average score for the class was 41.8, falling well
above a neutral score of 30. In general then, this class has a positive association with books,
read-alouds, and learning. As a whole, the class scored listening to informational text (3.8)
higher than listening to made-up stories (3.32). Most students (80%) chose the happiest Garfield
when asked about learning about bats, indicating that this was a high interest topic for the group.
24
Listening to a book more than once received the lowest score. Although at 3.16 it still indicates
a more positive than negative attitude, five students chose the least happy Garfield and two chose
the slightly unhappy Garfield indicating that there was a part of the group that had negative
feelings toward repeated readings.
Four students were chosen to participate in interviews as well. Prior to the unit, these
students were asked questions about their approaches to learning and the content that was
covered in the unit. See Appendix C for the interview protocol. To represent the range of
academic abilities present in the classroom, one student performing well below grade level, one
student performing slightly below grade level, one student performing on grade level, and one
student performing above grade level were chosen as interview subjects. The determination of
level was made through consultation with the classroom teacher using performance on ELA
work in the classroom and beginning of the year assessments (DIBELS and curriculum based) as
criteria. The classroom teacher also made recommendations based on student attendance and
willingness to talk. These factors were important because excessive absence would interfere
with hearing the text repeated times and it was important that students felt comfortable talking
about what they learned. Therefore students with excessive absences or unwillingness to speak
in class were excluded from consideration as interview subjects.
3.1.2 Text
As stressed in multiple studies (Donovan & Smolkin, 2002; Duke & Tower, 2004; Hoffman,
Collins, & Schickedanz, 2015), the selection of quality text is extremely important. For this
study, the 35 informational books on the topic of bats in the school library collection were
considered for inclusion. The first consideration was accurate and up to date information for the
25
content under investigation. Unfortunately, some published materials can “provide
misinformation or inadvertently reinforce children’s misconceptions” (Donovan & Smolkin,
2002, p. 508). To avoid this pitfall, I investigated the author’s credentials and documentation of
sources for books chosen for this unit.
In addition to accuracy, the language of the book should be complex, but accessible, as
students won’t learn much from a book that is too watered down or too complicated. By making
the book easy enough for young children, authors may not include enough information (Duke
and Tower, 2004). Children need to learn from the text for the experience to be worthwhile and
to hold their interest. Beyond just readability level, complexity of text involves depth and
breadth of content, density of informational ideas, the amount of explicit versus implicit content,
and lexical density (Donovan & Smolkin, 2002).
Engaging visuals are also an essential component of high-quality texts (Hoffman et al.,
2015) as “the illustrations contain much of the information to which children will attend”
(Donovan & Smolkin, 2002, p. 510). To support comprehension, I chose books with illustrations
that represent textual content rather than provide embellishment unrelated to the written words.
Captions for illustrations and diagrams are also extremely important because they direct the
reader’s attention to important information. Therefore, when choosing texts for this unit, I
analyzed the books for accurate and up to date content, complex but accessible language,
engaging visuals, and useful expository text features. See Appendix D for selection checklist.
3.1.3 Activity
I designed and implemented a two-week unit on bats including interactive read-alouds.
Kindergarten teachers in this district typically teach a one or two-week unit on bats near
26
Halloween. I chose to make the unit two weeks in order to complete multiple readings of a text
two times. The unit was constructed using the PA Core standards in ELA for reading
informational text as well as the Next Generation Science Standards for kindergarten. Table 2
describes the learning goals of the unit.
Table 2. Unit goals
Big Ideas Key Concepts Vocabulary
Week 1
Bats are animals, so they need, air, food, water, and shelter to survive
Bats are nocturnal. Nocturnal
Scientists classify animals based on characteristics.
Bats are mammals. Mammal
Different structures have specific functions for animals.
Unique
There are many different kinds of bats.
Echolocation
Week Two
Bats are beneficial to the environment.
Bats eat insects, pollinate flowers, and spread seeds.
Beneficial
Bats are threatened worldwide, and their colonies and habitats are destroyed — both intentionally and inadvertently.
Migrate
Hibernate
Each week consisted of three readings of a primary text as well as an additional
informational text and a narrative text. The six readings of the two primary texts and the
additional informational text read-aloud were video recorded. In addition, a separate audio
recording was made as a backup data collection source. These read-aloud sessions followed the
format designed by Beck and McKeown (2001) with Text Talk for conducting an interactive
27
read-aloud. Following each read-aloud of a primary text, students took a ten point multiple-
choice assessment. The questions and answers were projected on a screen and read aloud to
students who answered via a hand-held clicker. Following this assessment, or the read-aloud on
non-assessed days, students completed a post-reading activity as a whole group. Table 3 lists the
books, assessments, and activities for the unit.
After each read-aloud, I also conducted interviews with four students to allow open-
ended responses to demonstrate comprehension of the text. These interviews were recorded and
transcribed.
To address the question of the effect of repeated readings on comprehension, a primary
text was chosen for each week. This primary text was read initially on Monday, a second time
on Tuesday, and a third time on Wednesday. I followed the procedure for repeated read-alouds
developed by McGee and Schickedanz (2007), which are also in line with the Text Talk
procedure. I adapted the protocol that they used with narrative text to be appropriate for
informational text. Due to the length of the books, the entire book was not read each time.
Rather, sections that covered the big ideas and key concepts were selected. This allowed time
for discussion of ideas rather than passive listening.
Alternate versions of the assessment used to measure prior knowledge were given after
each of these readings. Also, the same students were interviewed after each reading, and their
responses were recorded and transcribed.
Table 3. Unit plan
Day Interactive Read-Aloud Book Assessment Post-reading Activity
Monday Bats Time for Kids 1st read • 10 Multiple choice questions using activotes
• Interviews
Bat food
28
Tuesday Bats Time for Kids 2nd read • 10 Multiple choice using activotes
• Interviews
Bat Homes
Wednesday Bats Time for Kids 3rd read • 10 Multiple choice using activotes
• Interviews
Batty words
Thursday (Animals in my Backyard) Bats by Aaron Carr
Bat diagram
Friday Stellaluna by Janell Cannon Bat/ Bird Venn diagram Monday Bats: Hunters of the Night
by Elaine Landau 1st read • 10 Multiple
choice using activotes
• Interview
Helpful Bats
Tuesday Bats: Hunters of the Night by Elaine Landau 2nd read
• 10 Multiple choice using activotes
• Interviews
Bats Can…
Wednesday Bats: Hunters of the Night by Elaine Landau 3rd read
• 10 Multiple choice using activotes
• Interviews
Batty Words
Thursday Bats: Nocturnal Flyers by Rebecca Rissman
Bat facts and misconceptions
Friday Bats in the Library by Brian Lies
3.2 PARTICIPANTS
I investigated the development of comprehension of informational texts by kindergarten students
in a single class of 25 students in a small suburban primary school that services students in
kindergarten through grade 3. The classroom teacher has 13 years of teaching experience,
Table 3 continued
29
including 8 in kindergarten and prior experience as a reading specialist. Approximately twice a
month, the class engages in units of study for non-fiction texts when informational books are
read daily. These books are read one time. During read-alouds, low level questions assess literal
recall, and the teacher reports that some students participate in the discussion while others just
“sit back and kind of absorb it.” The quiet students demonstrate their comprehension through
post reading activities such as writing or sequencing.
The racial makeup of the school is 91% white, 3% African American, 2.5% multi-racial,
2.5% Hispanic, and 1% Asian. 20% of the students are economically disadvantaged, as
evidenced by qualification for free and reduced lunch, and 16% receive special education
services. The full day academic style program is representative of many schools in
Pennsylvania. The school district has recently developed a new curriculum based on the
Pennsylvania Core Standards, which means instruction of informational text is expected in
kindergarten. This curriculum specifies a few topics to be covered by kindergarten teachers, but
does not include required readings, specific content ideas, or instructional strategies to
implement the units. Although “Bats” is not a topic specified in the curriculum, kindergarten
teachers throughout the district use this topic to cover the curriculum near Halloween.
In studying one classroom, observational data provided a rich picture of instructional
practices leading to a deep understanding of how comprehension manifests in this setting. There
are several limitations to the context I used. First, I work in the school, so I was mindful of
researcher positionality and any biases that arise from being part of the institution under study.
As the school librarian, I typically see a class once every six days for a forty-minute period
consisting of a lesson, story, and book borrowing. In this capacity I have the opportunity to
conduct interactive read-alouds. However, the schedule does not lend itself to the deep study of
30
concepts found in a unit or close reading through multiple reads of a text. Therefore, I was able
to collaborate with a classroom teacher in order to complete this study. To become more
familiar with the students in the class, I assisted during center time for a few weeks prior to the
study, in addition to seeing the students during their regularly scheduled library period. I also
visited the class four times during their ELA block to allow students to become familiar with the
activotes. I developed quizzes associated with their phonics unit to allow them to become
comfortable using the hand-held clickers. The week prior to the unit I visited the classroom to
administer the pre-test via activotes. In their library class that week, they also took the interest
survey. During the two weeks of the study, I visited the classroom for fifty minutes during their
ELA block. We started each session with the interactive read-aloud session. This was followed
by assessments or a follow-up activity.
The sample size was limited to one classroom, and is therefore rather small. Findings
may not be generalizable outside the population of this classroom and school setting.
31
4.0 FINDINGS
4.1 OVERVIEW
The purpose of this study was to investigate how teachers can support kindergarteners’
comprehension of informational text through the use of repeated read-alouds within a unit.
Therefore, I examined the process of comprehension and learning that occurred during the
interactive read-aloud events and the acquisition and retention of unit concepts.
Data collection occurred over the course of three weeks, including one week prior to the
unit of study and two weeks of the instructional unit being taught. Data collected included
measures of prior knowledge and interest for students, transcripts of the read-alouds events,
multiple-choice assessments, and interviews. Analysis of these data sought to answer the
following three questions:
(a) How do kindergarteners in this primary school engage in learning from and
comprehending informational text in the context of interactive read-alouds?
(b) How do students in this class demonstrate acquisition and retention of the concepts
presented in an informational text that is shared through an interactive read-aloud?
(c) In what ways do repeated readings of an informational text influence acquisition and
retention of concepts presented in the text for this class of kindergarten students?
32
4.2 RESEARCH QUESTION 1
How do kindergarteners in this primary school engage in learning from and comprehending
informational text in the context of interactive read-alouds?
To answer this question, a variety of data were collected and analyzed. I primarily relied
upon transcripts of the read-aloud events. I also used turn-and-talk responses and transcripts of
interviews. I fully transcribed the video recordings of the read-aloud sessions. I used process
analysis to analyze the transcripts, because the actions of the students during the read-aloud
sessions provided evidence of engagement in learning and comprehension. Process coding uses
“-ing” words for codes and is appropriate when coding an observable activity such as students
participating in a read-aloud event. (Saldana, 2016). Initial coding developed broad categories
of actions taken by students. In a second round of coding, subcodes were developed to detail
actions more explicitly. To check validity, the classroom teacher read and coded two full
transcripts. There was strong agreement on what was observed and any differences were
resolved through discussion. This code list was also applied to student responses to turn-and-talk
questions and student responses to interview questions designed to address the process of
comprehension. Student responses during “turn and talk” questions were recorded on several
iPads with Audio Notebook. Although not all pairs were recorded, a representation of responses
was collected verbatim.
I found that kindergarteners in this primary school engage in learning from and
comprehending informational text in the context of interactive read-alouds through the following
actions: answering teacher questions, connecting to prior knowledge, responding to classmates,
using visual aids, asking questions, responding chorally, acting out the text, and making
predictions.
33
4.2.1 Answering teacher questions
During each read aloud session, students responded to questions posed by the teacher.
Answering questions was subcoded by the depth of understanding of the text required to answer
the question. These researcher-generated codes were developed by adapting Norman Webb’s
Depth of Knowledge levels (Webb, 2002). See table 4 for an explanation of levels. Sample
questions and student responses at are also included. (All names are pseudonyms).
Table 4. Levels of questioning
Level Day Sample Questions Response
0 • required prior
knowledge only • no
comprehension of text required
1 (discussion of what animals need to survive) Where do we get air?
Jacob: outside
1 • required literal
recall of information stated in the text
• asked immediately following text being read, or delayed to review important vocabulary words and concepts
1
1
2
What did we just hear are good places for roosts?
Then we found out how bats use a special sense of hearing to find their prey. Do you remember what that’s called Sharon?
Does anyone remember another reason bats might need claws?
Sharon: a cave Kathryn: an attic Emma: tree Ava: cellar
Sharon: echolocation
Dominic: So they could grab food
2 • required students
to apply a skill or concept to a new situation.
1
When could you see a bat flying around at home? And why do you think that?
Brian and Ava: At night
Ava: because they are nocturnal
34
• may have involved classification or inference
3
4
Text: Vampire bats are found in Central and South America. T: So, do vampire bats live around here? Now, we know that bats are mammals, so when we hear that she was with her mother, how does that fit with her being a mammal? Kathryn? Do we all remember that mammals drink their mother’s milk? So it makes sense that babies stay with their mother.
Students: No
Kathryn: Because when it’s thirsty it would drink milk from its belly.
Students: yeah
3
• required students to use strategic thinking.
• may have involved making hypotheses or comparisons.
4 What do you think would happen if there were no bats around eating the insects? Kathryn? T: Who might?
Kathryn: um, they might hurt people
Kathryn: the insects
Students were generally successful with questions that required literal recall. When a
student was unable to answer a level 1 question correctly, either the text was reread and the
student was given another chance to answer, or another student answered the question, and the
initial student was given a chance to show they now knew the information. For example, on the
second day of the second week, the following exchange occurred.
Text: Bats are helpful to humans. Micro bats eat harmful insects. Many of these insects
destroy crops and spread disease.
Investigator: Oh boy, what did she say the insects do that is bad news?
Jacob: um, break, um harmful, um break bats homes.
Table 4 continued
35
Investigator: It did not tell us that insects break bat’s homes. What did it tell us?
Mia: They spread disease.
Investigator: That’s right. What did it say Jacob?
Jacob: spread disease
Sometimes scaffolding was necessary to help students draw conclusions from the text.
Using information from the text, students were initially unable to make an inference about what
would happen to bats if they were awakened during hibernation. Rereading a portion of the text
and offering prompts helped the students to work through this question.
Investigator: What would happen if people woke up the bats while they were
hibernating?
James: They would attack.
Investigator: I don’t think we heard anything that said bats attack people. We heard
they’re gentle, shy creatures. Right? So we would not expect bats to attack. Hmmm, Let
me think about why it said they were hibernating. I am going to go back and read it
again, because when we read it again, that helps us understand. Listen to why they
hibernate.
Text: Others hibernate, spending the winter in a deep sleep. This helps them to live
through the winter when there is little food.
Investigator: So, Sally, what would happen if they woke up?
Sally: They go sleep in the night.
Investigator: Well, they’re going to sleep all the time in the winter. What would happen
if they woke up and there was no food around? Anthony?
Anthony: Eat it all.
Investigator: There is no food around to eat. Sophia?
Sophia: They would be hungry.
Investigator: Yes, can they live without food?
students: no
Investigator: No, we know that. So what would happen to the bats if there was no food?
36
William: They would die.
Investigator: So, if people wake them up while they are hibernating, they could die.
Coming into the unit, Anthony had background knowledge that bats eat meat. Although
it is true that some bats eat meat, most do not, and this prior knowledge interfered with his
comprehension. A unit goal was to understand that an animal’s features had specific functions.
Therefore, looking at facial features should help a student determine what a particular bat eats.
Because Anthony clung to his belief that bats eat meat, he was unable to draw conclusions about
a bat’s diet from a photograph. To aid comprehension, I modeled thinking about specific
features that were relevant to the question.
Investigator: I think you’re absolutely right, we want to see what he looks like up close,
and up close I can see the big nose, and big eyes, and small ears. So, what do you think
this bat eats? What do you think? (many hands up)
Anthony: meat
Investigator: no, this bat would not eat meat, because we don’t see sharp claws and teeth
for catching meat. We see a big nose for smelling, big eyes for seeing, and small ears.
That means it doesn’t need to listen for its food. What do you think Holden?
Holden: uh, it’s a fruit bat.
Higher-level questions were initially asked to the students during turn-and-talk time. For
example, on the first day, students were asked, “Why would it be helpful for bats to have lighter
bones” and “Are there some bats who would not need echolocation?” Although some students
made the connection between lighter bones and flying, there were a lot of incorrect conclusions
drawn and off-topic answers made when these types of questions were asked. For example, to
answer the first, one student thought “Maybe because they are in the dark” and for the second, a
student responded, “I think bats go to the bathroom.” This pattern of off-topic and inaccurate
37
information was prevalent during the turn-and-talk discussions of the first two readings. After a
debriefing with the classroom teacher, we decided to use the turn-and-talk questions to
emphasize important information at a literal recall level. Higher-level questioning was reserved
for whole-group discussion where scaffolding could be provided and feedback given to correct
misconceptions. Once these questions were discussed in the whole-group, they could be asked
as a turn-and-talk question during a subsequent rereading of the text. For example, on the third
day, turn-and-talk questions included “What do bats eat?” and “What would be good shelter for
bats?” Because these questions had multiple answers but could be literally recalled from the text
and discussion, students were able to talk to one another, stay on task, and generate correct
responses.
During each read-aloud event, answering teacher questions was an important strategy for
students to learn from and comprehend the text. Many questions assessed literal recall of text
concepts and vocabulary words. Students were generally successful with these questions.
Questions that required higher order thinking were also asked, and results were mixed. Based on
the responses provided during turn-and-talk questions, and in some whole-group discussion,
some students were not ready for making inferences and drawing conclusions independently.
Using scaffolding in the whole group, they were able to tackle these questions and make sense of
the text at a deeper level.
4.2.2 Connecting to prior knowledge
Connecting to prior knowledge was another strategy that students used frequently during all
read-alouds. Students contributed prior factual knowledge, made personal connections, or told
38
stories that they felt related to the text. These three subcodes were further classified as on-topic,
off-topic, or misinformation.
Most often students contributed prior factual knowledge, which was on topic. Examples
of misinformation occurred most frequently on the first day of the unit, where ten instances
occurred. When these statements were made, the teacher tried to provide immediate feedback to
correct the misunderstanding, as in the following example.
William: Some bats have fangs and they turn into Draculas.
Investigator: That’s not a real bat. That’s only in movies. We are learning about real
bats.
On subsequent days there were no more than two instances of misinformation, indicating
that students did acquire and apply concepts from the unit. Even on the first day though, some
students were able to contribute prior knowledge that was on-topic. The following exchange
occurred during the introductory discussion of the text and setting of goals.
William: Bats live in caves.
Investigator: One of the things we said they need is shelter, and that’s an example. So
we will find out some other places that they will live too.
William: And high trees.
Investigator: Sounds like you know a lot about where bats live. Good.
Sometimes students offered information to the class that was only tangentially related to
the text or did not relate to the part of the text that was being read. These contributions were
coded as off-task. For example, on the first day we read that vampire bats drink blood from
animals including chickens. Jacob then added, “Chickens can um, run without their heads for
only three minutes.” On the sixth day, when we were reading about and discussing the benefits
of fruit bats, Holden stated, “Bats um can be nocturnal. And they can be nocturnal hanging in
39
the caves with their claws and hanging in trees.” Although both boys offered information that
they knew to be true, it did not aid in comprehension, as it was not relevant to what was being
read at the time.
Students also reported personal connections to the text. Again, some were on-topic and
helped students to construct meaning. For example, Kathryn pointed to a bat craft that was
hanging on the wall and said, “There is a bat there, and we made it from the socks.” Since all
students had made their own bat, this was an opportunity to activate prior knowledge about bat
structures that were included in the project and relate them to the text goal of understanding
different structures have specific functions for animals. Other comments may have only been
useful for activating prior knowledge in the student commenting, such as when James stated,
“Whenever I go to the zoo I see bats there.”
When we read the book Bats: Nocturnal Flyers, James commented that this sister’s name
is Rebecca, like the author, and William added that his sister’s friend was also named Rebecca.
Although it is natural for the students to respond to a name that has a personal connection for
them, it did not help them to comprehend the text.
Beyond a quick personal connection, some students shared stories that they felt related to
the text. When we read that bats eat harmful insects we talked about what “Many of these insects
destroy crops” meant. Sharon told a story about an animal eating her mother’s snap pea plants.
Although there was a connection to the idea of crops being destroyed and she was very
enthusiastic in while relating the story, it was clear that insects were not the ones eating the
plants. Furthermore, the time spent on speculating what might be eating the plants may have
been better spent on the actual text. Shorter stories like the following told by Anthony were
40
more common. The follow-up question was used to focus the story on the concept of bats being
nocturnal, which is what was being discussed at the time.
Anthony: I find uh, I saw a bat. I was outside with my brother and my grandma and we
saw a bat.
Investigator: OK, was it nighttime? Was it getting dark?
Anthony : It was kinda dark.
The sharing of prior knowledge was an important way for students to comprehend the
text. Sharing their understanding was a way to alert the investigator to misconceptions that
needed to be clarified. Personal connections made the text more meaningful. As the unit
progressed, prior knowledge that was shared tended to be more accurate and relevant. However,
students did also share irrelevant or tangential information that did not aid in a deeper
understanding of the text. At this young age, these students needed to be guided to understand
how their prior knowledge could help them understand new information as well as how it could
interfere with their learning.
4.2.3 Responding to classmates
A third way that students engaged in learning from the text was to respond to their classmates.
They did this by agreeing, disagreeing, extending their classmate’s comment, or by answering a
question. The exchanges between the students demonstrate that the read-aloud experience was
not a passive one of receiving information from the teacher, but rather an active process of
constructing meaning within a community of learners.
Sometimes students spoke to express their agreement with a classmate. On the first day,
William stated “Or you could find them in caves that are really dark” and Dominic agreed
41
“That’s where they live.” Often this agreement took the form of just repeating the other
student’s comment.
Students also felt comfortable expressing disagreement with their classmates. On the second
day of the unit we were discussing animals’ need for shelter. The following exchange occurred.
Brian: caves are like good and safe
Investigator: good and safe, ok
Sharon: but maybe bears are in those caves
Sharon’s concern that a cave might not in fact be safe led to a discussion about how bats
find safe shelter and which animals are or are not a threat to bats.
On day 4 when discussing the vocabulary word unique, the investigator wanted to
emphasize that bats are unique because they are the only mammals that fly. The following
exchange shows how Jacob helped Brian to understand this idea.
Investigator: Other mammals walk or swim. Only a bat is a mammal that can fly
Brian: But birds can fly too.
Jacob: But they’re not mammals.
More often than merely agreeing or disagreeing with what their classmate said, students
tended to extend the idea that was shared. The following from the day 8 read-aloud shows how
William wants to emphasize that the size of the tree is important for a bat’s shelter.
Investigator: Brian how do they stay safe?
Brian: in a tree. The top of a tree
Investigator: It could be a tree
William: And um, and um, um, not small trees, really, really, big trees
42
The following day when we were discussing possible locations for bats to find shelter,
Emma thought that a garden would be a good place, but was having trouble finishing her
thought. Sharon offered that perhaps she meant a garden shed, and Emma agreed that that was
what she was thinking.
A final way that students responded to their classmates was by answering each other’s
questions. Sometimes these answers were correct, and sometimes incorrect, so as with teacher-
generated questions, misconceptions needed to be clarified. The following examples illustrate
these two situations.
From Day 7:
Investigator: On this page I see two more bold words. Migrate and hibernate.
Sharon: What’s hibernate?
James: um, hibernate means that they sleep all the winter and they’re awake in the spring
and summer.
From Day 4:
Anthony: What is that, what is that um, what is that green stuff that bat is eating?
Investigator: That’s an insect.
Brian: That’s a snake.
Investigator: Not a snake:
Aiden S.: A worm
Investigator: This is a very close up picture, so it looks bigger. In real life it would be
small like this. An insect, Ok?
Turn-and-talk questions also offered a natural time for students to respond to one another.
Rather than just answering the teacher’s question for the group, two students worked together to
make meaning. In these responses, they were also observed to agree with one another, such as
when students responded, “I was going to say the same thing” or “yeah, they do.” They showed
43
an ability to take turns and even ask for feedback rather than just focusing on their own answers.
For example, when discussing what is dangerous for a bat a student responded, “I think humans
are harmful for bats. What do you think?” At another point, a student said, “you go first” and
listened to his partner before responding. Students also disagreed with each other. In the
following exchange, two students are discussing what is dangerous for a bat.
S1: Bats are scared of humans because they’re bigger than them.
S2: No, they’re just the biggest threat.
S1: But they’re bigger than them right?
S2: Yeah
In this exchange, it’s clear that the second student understood that the biggest threat to a
bat didn’t have to do with physical size, but about how dangerous something was. The first
student continued to focus on physical size, but this does illustrate an example of disagreement
when one student attempted to help another student gain deeper understanding. As in the large
group discussion, they also extended each other’s ideas. The following examples show how
students agree with their partner but then add more to extend the thinking or deepen the
understanding. The following is in response to the question “Why are senses of sight and smell
important to these bats?”
S1: to smell food
S2: oh, I know, maybe so they can smell animals and other fruit and stuff.
In response to the question “What might happen if there were no microbats around?”
S1: there would be so many bugs everywhere
S2: bugs spread diseases and people get sick
44
By responding to their classmates, students were able to construct meaning and
demonstrate comprehension. In agreeing, disagreeing, extending ideas, and answering questions
students took an active role in the read-aloud event.
4.2.4 Using visual aids
The use of visual aids was another strategy employed by students to comprehend the text. Most
often they used photographs to support their understanding and made spontaneous comments
about the photographs. Charts and diagrams also appeared in the text and the investigator drew
attention to these text features during the read-alouds.
Students used the photographs in the text to support their understanding of the unit
concepts. For example, students identified fish as something eaten by some bats and caves as a
place for shelter by using photographs. During second and third readings of texts, students
identified specific types of bats such as the lesser bulldog bat and vampire bat when their
pictures appeared. Holden often commented that bats were nocturnal and when asked how he
knew that, he explained that they were flying or eating at night in the photograph. After each
reading of one of the primary text, the four students who were interviewed were asked if the
author had done anything to make it easier to learn about bats. Four out of the five times that he
was interviewed, Jacob reported that the inclusion of photographs was helpful. Kathryn also
reported this three out of the six times she was asked.
Sometimes the visual aids needed to be explained to avoid misunderstanding their
purpose or the content of the text. The following exchange illustrates this.
Brian: They’re could go in cars
45
Investigator: Ok, I think Brian noticed the picture of the car, so let’s see what the author
did. The author wants to help you understand how big bats are. They are not telling us
that bats go in a car, but can you see how big the car is? [students: yeah] And then can
you see the bat that is on top of the car spreading out his wings? [students: yeah]
Text: The flying fox of Indonesia is the world’s biggest bat. It has six-foot wide
wingspan. That’s wider than a car!
There was still some misunderstanding about the purpose of the picture, as William then
commented, “Maybe the maybe the bat flied and the car was driving.” The investigator then
clarified that the picture was there only to show the relative size of the bat and pointed out the
bumblebee bat, which was depicted near the side mirror of the car to show how small it is.
During the first post-reading interview, when asked if the author did anything to make it easier to
learn about bats, both Kathryn and Jacob reported the use of this diagram. Kathryn also noted
that this was helpful after the second reading. The investigator also guided students through
using the diagram of the bat to show bat features and the diagram of echolocation to explain that
process.
Using visual aids was an important comprehension strategy for students. Photographs
were used most often and information from the captions became knowledge that students shared
in subsequent readings. Because diagrams are common in informational texts, the investigator
modeled their use for students during initial readings of the primary texts. They were asked to
explain them during the repeated readings, with this scaffolding designed to focus their attention
on how text features such as diagrams can aid in comprehension.
46
4.2.5 Asking questions
A fifth action taken by the students during the read-aloud to engage in learning from the text was
to ask questions. Students primarily asked for definitions of words in the text. They also wanted
clarification on concepts presented in the text or what was presented in a photograph. The
following exchange demonstrates how asking questions was encouraged as a strategy for
students to comprehend text.
Text: Bats are rarely seen during the day. That is because they are nocturnal.
James: What does rarely mean?
Investigator: Oh, good question. I love how James asked what a word means, because if
you don’t know what a word means when you’re reading, a good idea is to ask the
teacher what it means. Rarely means hardly ever. So, they are hardly ever seen during
the day. They are rarely seen during the day. It hardly ever happens. Nocturnal means
awake during the night.
On several occasions, Sharon asked for a word to be defined. When the response was
given she then demonstrated her understanding by applying the word to a new situation. For
example, when she asked what enemies meant, she told a story about a student having enemies,
but clarified that it was just pretend. She asked for the word “prey” to be defined, and later in the
read-aloud when the text stated that bats use echolocation to find food, she added “To find prey”
showing that she remembered the definition.
Through questioning, students were able to express confusion and have words, concepts,
and images clarified for them. They were empowered to lead the discussion in a certain
direction so that they could construct meaning from the text.
47
4.2.6 Responding chorally
Students also engaged in responding chorally as an activity to comprehend the text. Some choral
responses were spontaneous responses to the text, such as saying “awww” when the picture of a
bat pup was first shown or gasping the first time vampire bats were mentioned in the text.
However, most were investigator initiated. Choral responses were one way to rehearse
vocabulary words. For example at the end of the first reading, the vocabulary words were
reviewed in the following way.
Investigator: Our first word we learned means being active at night and sleeping during
the day. Who remembers that one?
Emma: Nocturnal
Investigator: Good, everyone say nocturnal
Students: nocturnal
Likewise, big ideas of the unit were reviewed through choral response. Understanding these
vocabulary words and big ideas were essential for truly comprehending the text. Therefore,
choral responses allowed all students to participate and stay engaged with the text. The
following exchange is from day 3 of the unit.
Investigator: OK, today we remembered that there are four things all animals need. All
animals need (pantomime taking a big breath)
Students: air
Investigator: And all animals need (pantomime taking a bite with a fork)
Students: food
Investigator: And all animals need (pantomime taking a drink from a glass)
Students: Water
Investigator: And all animals need (pantomime a roof over head)
Students: Shelter
48
Rather than raising their hands or being called on to answer some questions, students also
responded chorally. For example when asked what a bat was eating in a picture, the students all
responded that it was a fish.
Responding chorally was an activity that allowed all students to become active in the
read-aloud process. Even reluctant speakers could participate because they were not asked to
speak alone in front of their classmates. It allowed for repetition of vocabulary words and big
ideas to aid retention.
4.2.7 Acting out the text
Students were also observed acting out the text. By using their bodies to demonstrate ideas from
the text, students showed another way to engage with and learn from the text. Some of these
actions were spontaneous responses from the students, while others were directed by the
investigator to give the students a kinesthetic way to interact with the text
On the first day, William flapped his arms to demonstrate flying when he shared his prior
knowledge that bats have wings. At times throughout the unit other students did this when the
text was about flying or if they were answering a question in which flying was involved. During
that first read aloud, several students also made squeaking noises when the text stated, “Bats
produce very high sounds.” During turn-and talk discussions, students sometimes acted out their
responses such as flapping wings when discussing the purpose of lighter bones or to demonstrate
migration. They also pantomimed licking to show how a vampire bat eats blood and made
squeaking sounds when discussing echolocation.
The investigator also initiated several instances for students to act out the text. During
the second day, students were encouraged to make claws and show their fangs when discussing
49
how these structured functioned for bats in catching prey. On the third day, two students acted
out the concept of echolocation, with one student playing the part of the bat, and another the part
of the bug. Although a diagram was provided in the text, some students still struggled with the
concept. After the demonstration by the students, the class reported understanding the concept
better. In addition, Kathryn reported during the post-reading interview that the demonstration of
echolocation helped her to understand the book better.
During the second week of the unit, students were asked to pantomime hibernation and
migration. During the first reading, one student was asked to demonstrate migration for the class
by “flying” from the back of the room to the front. We discussed why he was traveling. On
subsequent readings, all students were asked to pantomime flying with the word migration, and
sleeping with the word hibernation.
By acting out the text, students were able to connect with the text in another way.
Because their spontaneous responses such as flapping their arms or making squeaking sounds
matched the text, it indicates comprehension. They also reported that acting out concepts such as
echolocation helped them to understand them better.
4.2.8 Making predictions
The final action students took that was coded for engaging in learning and comprehending the
text was making predictions. This did not occur in all read-aloud sessions, and was observed
almost exclusively during initial rather than repeated readings of texts. Students used both
photographs and text to make predictions. For example, on the first day of the unit, students saw
a picture of a bat flying out of a cave, which led to a student making the following prediction.
50
Text: Night has fallen. It is time for this little bat to spread its wings and soar away.
Brian: I think he’s going to get food.
This prediction fit with our earlier discussion that all animals including bats need food to live.
Likewise the following prediction made during the second week of the unit fits with what we had
already learned about bats being beneficial.
Text: Pollen – tiny grains from flowering plants that are needed to make new plants
Investigator: We need to find out how pollen gets around to different flowers. Let’s see
Sharon: Bats fly them around.
Although making predictions did not occur frequently, some students did use this strategy
to make meaning from the text. By using clues from pictures and thinking about what we had
already read, they showed an ability to make connections beyond the literal text.
4.2.9 Summary
The students in this class engaged with the text in a variety of ways. During the read-aloud
events, they were observed answering teacher questions, connecting to prior knowledge,
responding to classmates, using visual aids, asking questions, responding chorally, acting out the
text, and making predictions. These actions allowed them to access the content of the text and
construct meaning together as a community of learners.
51
4.3 RESEARCH QUESTION 2
How do students in this class demonstrate acquisition and retention of the concepts presented in
an informational text that is shared through an interactive read-aloud?
Data sources to address this question include pre-test and post-test data from multiple-
choice assessments and interview transcripts. Only the post-test from the first reading of each
week was considered. Scores from subsequent post-tests were considered in relation to research
question 3 regarding the effects of rereading texts. Mean scores of the multiple choice
assessments were analyzed with a paired samples t-test. Interview responses were scored using a
rubric. Scores from both measures indicate that students did learn concepts presented in the text
following an interactive read-aloud.
4.3.1 Pre-test
The pre-test was scored to determine the level of background knowledge about unit concepts for
individuals and the group as a whole. The topic was considered familiar for students scoring at
least 70% on the pre-test. There were three students whose scores indicated familiarity with the
unit concepts for week 1, although no student scored higher than 70%. As a group, the students
scored 45.2% for week one concepts and 38% for week two concepts. The highest score for
week two was 60%, which two students received. Relative familiarity with the topic can also be
used as a variable when analyzing comprehension scores. Comprehension difficulties can be
evaluated in relation to knowledge base (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). The pre-test scores indicate
that the information to be taught in this unit was relatively unfamiliar to this group of students.
52
4.3.2 Whole group multiple-choice assessment
After one interactive read-aloud of the primary text, students took a ten point multiple-choice
assessment. During week one, all twenty-five students were present for the first read-aloud. The
average score increased from 43.3% to 63.6%. In addition, twelve students scored at least 70%,
compared with only three on the pre-test. For the second week, twenty-four students were preset
for the first read-aloud. The average score increased from 38.8% to 70.4%. Seventeen students
scored at least 70% with two students answering all questions correctly. During the second
week, students did have the benefit of building on the knowledge they obtained in the first week.
This may have led to increased comprehension of the second week primary text. However, the
unit concepts and vocabulary that were assessed were not introduced in the first week.
A paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the average test score on the pre-test
and post-test for both weeks of the unit. For week one, there was a significant difference in the
scores for pretest (M = 4.52, SD = 2.9) and post-test (M = 6.36, SD = 2.74) conditions (t(25) = -
5.12, p = 0.00003). Likewise in week two, there was a significant difference in the scores for
pretest (M = 3.88, SD = 2.02) and post-test (M = 7.04, SD = 4.39) conditions (t(24) = -8.46, p =
0.00000002). These results show that students were able to demonstrate acquisition and
retention of concepts by answering multiple-choice questions more accurately after the reading.
4.3.3 Interviews
Interviews transcripts were scored based on a rubric to determine level of mastery of key
concepts. To represent the range of academic abilities present in the classroom, one student
performing well below grade level (Anthony), one student performing slightly below grade level
53
(Dominic), one student performing on grade level (Jacob), and one student performing above
grade level (Kathryn) were chosen as interview subjects. In general, scores after the first reading
of the primary text showed a considerable increase from the interviews before the unit started.
In the first week, Dominic’s score increased from zero to four points. His pre-unit
answers showed that he had some prior knowledge of bats, but was unable to apply it to
comprehension questions. For example, he knew that bats had wings and could fly, but did not
know that this made them unique as a mammal. He also held some misconceptions about bats.
When asked about what bats need, Dominic replied “shade”. He went on to explain his answer
by saying, “cuz when it’s sun? Some vampire when I watched a video a vampire was in the
sunshine and it popped out the sun and it shined onto the boss and it was a vampire”. After one
reading of the primary text he was still unable to answer many comprehension questions.
However, he did know that bats need shelter to survive. He knew that bats could eat fruits such
as bananas. He answered that mammals drink their mother’s milk. He also knew that during
echolocation bats made squeaking sounds. Although Dominic had not mastered all of the unit
concepts, he was beginning to show an understanding of some of the important vocabulary
words and big ideas. He did express some frustration with trying to comprehend the text. When
asked if there was anything we did as a class to make the book easier to understand, he answered,
“No, I keep not understanding.” In the second week, Dominic showed a minimal improvement
from his pre-unit answers to the interview after the first reading. When asked about what was
dangerous for bats, he correctly answered people, but still listed sun as a danger.
Jacob demonstrated more acquisition and retention of concepts from the read-aloud than
Dominic. After the first reading of Bats by the Editors of Time for Kids, his score improved
from four to nine. The pre-unit score of four indicates that Jacob did have some relevant prior
54
knowledge prior to the read-aloud. For example, he knew that bats eat bugs and flew at night to
get those bugs. After the first reading he was also able to correctly explain the vocabulary words
of nocturnal, unique, and mammal. Some of his answers showed a more sophisticated
understanding of the concepts, even if they did not receive more points. The following exchange
about echolocation took place prior to the unit.
Investigator: What can you tell me about echolocation?
Jacob: Echolocation is when they use they um these I think they squawk or something.
Investigator: OK, can you tell me any more?
Jacob: Um, and also um if they lost their herd they would just um squawk again until
they came.
In contrast, after the first reading he answered in the following way.
Investigator: What can you tell me about echolocation?
Jacob: Cuz he squeaks like this *squeak*
Investigator: And then what?
Jacob: Then the bugs come and the bats eat them.
From this exchange, it’s clear that Jacob has learned that echolocation helps bats to get
their food rather than find their “herd.” However, both answers earned just one point because he
mentioned the bats making a high-pitched noise. He did not include the idea of an echo
bouncing back to help the bat locate the bugs. Jacob was also able to consider approaches to
comprehension and stated that the turn-and-talk strategy made the book easier to understand. In
week two, Jacob’s score increased from two prior to the unit to five after one reading. Although
there wasn’t as large of an increase, Jacob did demonstrate an understanding of things that were
dangerous for bats. He knew that people and predators were dangerous and that bats could lose
55
their homes. Although the gain was smaller, Jacob clearly comprehended at least parts of the
text. He again noted the helpfulness of turn-and-talk.
Like Jacob, Kathryn’s scores showed that she was able to learn from the text, with her
week one score increasing from four prior to the unit to eight after one reading. In particular, she
was able to define nocturnal, give characteristics of a mammal, and provide examples of how
bats meet their needs, which she could not do prior to the unit. She was also able to give a
partial explanation of echolocation. Like Jacob, even when she did not receive more points, she
showed greater understanding. One important concept in this unit is that all animals have the
same basic needs. Prior to the unit Kathryn already knew that animals need food, air, and water
to survive. After one reading, she also knew that animals require shelter, but she had already
received the maximum number of points for the question by supplying three responses prior to
the unit. In the second week, she showed a similar gain, with her score increasing from two
prior to the unit to six after one reading. Like Jacob, Kathryn expressed that turn-and-talk helped
her to understand the text.
Unlike the other three students, Anthony’s responses during the interview did not indicate
that he learned anything during the read-aloud events, or that he was unable to articulate what he
had learned. For week one concepts, Anthony scored two prior to the unit and one after the first
reading. For week two concepts, he scored zero both before the unit and after one reading. He
most often simply answered, “I don’t know.” One response that he gave indicates that he may
not have understood the question itself.
Investigator: What things does a bat need in order to live?
Anthony: ummmm in a tunnel?
Investigator: OK, what does it need to live?
Anthony: Ummm, in a tree
56
Although he recalled that tunnels and trees are places that bats can live, he was answering
the question “Where do bats live”, instead of the actual question asked, which was “What do bats
need?” After one reading of the text, the only other question that Anthony attempted to answer
was “What do bats eat?” after the investigator supplied that food was one of the bats’ needs. He
said that bats eat meat, which while true was only briefly mentioned in the text in contrast to
other more common foods. This was a piece of prior knowledge that Anthony brought to the
unit and mentioned frequently throughout the unit. The open-ended format of the interview
questions may have been difficult for Anthony to understand. He did slightly better on the
multiple-choice questions, scoring two on the pre-test for week one and four on the first post-
test. In week two, both his pre-test and first post-test scores were five. Anthony did appear to be
listening during the read-aloud, participated in the turn-and-talk strategy, and contributed to the
discussion. He spoke five times during the first reading of week two, indicating that he was
paying attention to the text and the discussion. Despite this, he was unable to demonstrate
retention of the vocabulary and concepts in the text. This indicates that while the interactive
read-aloud is an appropriate strategy for developing comprehension skills in kindergarten
students, it is not adequate for all students.
4.3.4 Summary
Based on the scores from the pre-test and post-test multiple-choice assessments and interview
rubric, the informational text read-aloud promoted acquisition and retention of the concepts
presented in the text. As a whole, the class was able to answer significantly more comprehension
questions correctly after one reading of the primary text. Three of the four students interviewed
also made gains in their comprehension and were able to more fully explain concepts from the
57
unit. Two of the students cited the turn-and-talk strategy as beneficial to their comprehension.
These students are also the two performing at or above grade level in the regular ELA class.
This indicates that students who perform better on other reading tasks in the classroom may
show more growth from the interactive read-aloud and acquire and retain more information from
the unit.
4.4 RESEARCH QUESTION 3
In what ways do repeated readings of an informational text influence acquisition and retention of
concepts presented in the text for this class of kindergarten students?
To determine the effect of repeated readings of a text, I considered data from pre-test and
post-test assessments after each of the three readings of the primary texts. Only scores from
students who were present for all three readings were considered in this analysis. For both
weeks, twenty-one students were included. In addition, interview transcripts were scored based
on a rubric to determine level of mastery of key concepts. Mean scores of the multiple choice
assessments were analyzed with a paired samples t-test. Interview responses were scored using a
rubric. Scores from both measures indicate that acquisition and retention of concepts presented
in the text improved with repeated readings of the text.
58
4.4.1 Whole group multiple choice assessment
As stated in the previous section, student scores on the first post-test were statistically significant
compared to the pre-test for both weeks. Scores continued to rise after each reading of the text.
For the first week, the average scores of the twenty-one students included increased from 43.3%
on the pre-test to 62.9% on the first post-test, 67.1% on the second post-test, and 81.4% on the
third post-test. On the third post-test, seventeen of the students scored at least 70%, with six
answering all questions correctly. For the second week, the average scores of the twenty-one
students included increased from 36.7% on the pre-test to 70.0% on the first post-test, 72.9% on
the second post-test, and 86.7% on the third post-test. Nineteen students scored over 70% on the
third-post-test, with eight answering all questions correctly.
A paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the average test score on the first post-
test and second post-test for both weeks of the unit. In addition, a paired-samples t-test was
conducted to compare the average test score on the second post-test and third post-test for both
weeks of the unit.
For week one, there was not a significant difference in the scores for the first post-test (M
= 6.29, SD = 2.91) and second post-test (M = 6.71, SD = 4.81) conditions (t(21) = -1, p = 0.329).
However, there was a significant difference in the scores for the second post-test (M = 6.71, SD
= 4.81) and the third post-test (M = 8.14, SD = 3.23) conditions (t(21) = -4.56, p = 0.00019).
Likewise in week two, there was not a significant difference in the scores for the first post-test
(M = 7.0, SD = 4.6) and second post-test (M = 7.29, SD = 2.51) conditions (t(21) = -0.78, p =
0.444). Again, there was a significant difference between the second post-test (M = 7.29, SD =
2.51) and the third post-test (M = 8.67, SD = 2.83) conditions (t(21) = -4.22, p = .00042). These
results suggest that repeated readings of the primary text did improve comprehension of the text.
59
By reading the text a third time, comprehension scores improved significantly and the number of
students reaching mastery of the unit content also increased.
4.4.2 Interviews
Prior to the unit, and after each reading of a primary text, four students were interviewed and
asked questions about unit vocabulary and concepts. To represent the range of academic abilities
present in the classroom, one student performing well below grade level (Anthony), one student
performing below grade level (Dominic), one student performing on grade level (Jacob), and one
student performing above grade level (Kathryn) were chosen as interview subjects. Interviews
transcripts were scored based on a rubric to determine level of mastery of key concepts. The two
students performing at or above grade level showed clear improvement of understanding with
each rereading. Dominic was inconsistent, while Anthony showed no improvement throughout
the unit. Table 5 shows the scores from the interview assessments.
Table 5. Scores from interview assessments
Name Prior to Unit After 1st Reading After 2nd Reading After 3rd Reading
Week 1: Bats by the Editors of Time for Kids; maximum points = 13
Anthony 2 1 1 2
Dominic 0 4 5 7
Jacob 4 9 12 absent
Kathryn 4 8
11 13
Week 2: Bats: Hunters of the Night by Elaine Landau; maximum points = 12
Anthony 0 0 absent 0
60
Dominic 1 2 4 2
Jacob 2 5 6 12
Kathryn 2 6 10 11
Dominic’s answers during his interviews showed that repeated readings did allow him to
acquire more information, but retention of these concepts was inconsistent. For example, his
overall score increased after each reading during week one. However, although he could fully
explain what nocturnal meant after the second reading, he answered, “I don’t know” after the
third. He knew that we had discussed babies drinking their mother’s milk, but he applied that
information to the vocabulary word unique, and inconsistently as a characteristic of a mammal.
He stated this a characteristic of a mammal after the first and third readings, but not after the
second. The only concept that seemed to develop more fully over the course of the repeated
readings was survival needs. Prior to the unit, he could not name anything that an animal needs
to survive. After the first and second reading, he could recall shelter as a need. After the third
reading, he recalled food and water as well as shelter. During week two, Dominic showed
similar inconsistencies. After two readings he could explain the word beneficial, but after the
third reading he said that it meant they travel. Even after three readings, he could not explain
important concepts such as how bats are helpful or how people could help bats. Again, he did
show consistent improvement with one concept. When asked what are some things that are
dangerous for bats, Dominic came into the unit with misinformation that sun and bees are
dangerous. After the first and second readings, he identified people as a danger, and by the third
reading he identified people and snakes as dangerous, without including any misinformation
such as the sun. During this final interview, Dominic also asked to look back in the book.
Table 5 continued
61
Although he was not given points for answering the questions after looking back, he did employ
a strategy to get the information. For four questions, Dominic asked to look back in the book. I
reread the page with the appropriate information needed to answer the question, and he correctly
answered. Asking to look back in the text shows that Dominic was thinking about strategies to
help him understand the text. During the interviews, he also stated that the turn-and-talk strategy
and shortening the amount of text read at one time helped him to understand the book better. He
had positive feelings toward rereading the text stating at times that he was “happy, so I can learn
more” and felt “good, so I can be a good listener” when asked about hearing the text a second or
third time.
Jacob and Kathryn both demonstrated improved comprehension after each reading of the
text. They were able to retain the information that they learned after one reading and add to it
after the second and third readings. They showed a similar development of concepts. Prior to
the unit they were not able to explain the vocabulary words, did not know characteristics of a
mammal, and knew only some of the needs of animals. After one reading, they both could
explain the word nocturnal. After two readings they were also able to explain the word unique
and name all four needs of animals and give multiple examples of food and shelter for bats.
After the first and second reading, both also could identify hair or fur as a characteristic of
mammals. After the third reading Kathryn also noted drinking mother’s milk as a characteristic,
while Jacob was absent. Kathryn was also able to show a deepening of her understanding of the
concept of echolocation after multiple readings. Prior to the unit she had no knowledge of
echolocation. After one reading, she stated that it helps the bat find food, and after two readings
she explained that, “If it’s close it will make loud in its ears. If it’s far it will make quiet.” After
a third reading, she was able to give this more complete description, “The bat makes a squeaking
62
sound and then it bounces off something and then it, it um. Then it comes back to its ears. If it’s
high, if it’s loud that means it’s close and if it’s low that means it’s far away.” Some of this
comprehension success may be attributed to the use of metacognitive strategies. Both students
shared during several interviews that the turn-and-talk strategy helped them to understand the
book better. Kathryn also stated that reading the book more than once helped her to understand
better. When asked how they felt about reading the books a second or third time, both gave
positive feedback. Kathryn said that she learned more and with a third reading, “It made me
remember even more.” Jacob was more motivated by his interest in the subject, as he stated that
rereading the books made him feel, “good, because I really liked the book.”
When considering the results of the multiple-choice assessments, Anthony showed some
inconsistencies, but did improve his comprehension score with repeated readings. In week one,
his pre-test score was 20%. After one reading he improved to 40%, after two readings scored
just 10%, and after the third scored 60%. In week two, his pre-test score was 50%. This
remained the same after one reading. He was absent for one day, and then for his second hearing
of the text, which was the third reading for the class, he scored 80%. He appeared engaged in the
read-aloud by asking questions and elaborating on classmate’s responses. He did cling to some
prior knowledge that was not supported by the text. For example, when talking about dangers
for bats, the text discussed humans as the biggest threat, other predators, and the cold, which
leads to a lack of a food supply. Anthony however continued to say “fire” when asked what was
dangerous for bats. He also did not seem to understand why cutting down trees where bats live
was dangerous for them. He responded, “Then then some sticks will go on his back.” To
reiterate the concept that it was losing its home that was dangerous, the investigator replied, “No,
it’s because he won’t have shelter. All animals need shelter. They need somewhere to live.”
63
Yet, during the interview, when asked about what could be dangerous for bats, he answered
“sticks” referring to his incorrect inference during the discussion rather than information
supplied by the text. His inability to correctly answer any questions during the interview indicate
that the open-ended format of these questions may have been difficult for Anthony to understand
and did not allow him to access any information that he had learned from the text. The multiple-
choice questions were all accompanied by pictures, which may have aided in Anthony’s recall.
The reason for the lack of improvement in answering any of the interview questions remains
unclear. Anthony was the only student of the four who was unable to tell anything that the
author did to make the book easier to understand or anything that we did as a class to make it
easier. As the youngest of the four students, his age may be a factor. There also may be some
underlying language processing issues, as he performs below grade-level in his regular ELA
class.
4.4.3 Summary
The results of the multiple-choice assessments and individual interviews suggest that repeated
readings of an informational text improve acquisition and retention of concepts presented in the
text. Average comprehension scores increased with each reading of the text and more students
reached mastery of unit concepts. Interviews also showed a deeper understanding of unit
concepts developing with repeated readings. Again, students who typically performed better on
reading tasks in the classroom fared better on comprehension tasks.
In any classroom, a single teaching strategy may not be effective for all students. At the
beginning of the kindergarten year, this may be particularly true, as some students are being
exposed to formal schooling for the first time. It may require more exposure to interactive
64
discussions surrounding text before some students are able to engage in a way that increases
acquisition and retention of concepts and allows them to articulate their learning. Specific
strategies may need to be taught to these learners that do not seem to naturally pick up on the
language through the modeling and scaffolding that occurs during the interactive read-aloud.
4.5 SUMMARY
The results of this study suggest that the students in this kindergarten class engage with text
during an interactive read-aloud in order to construct meaning from and comprehend the text.
They used a variety of strategies to do this including answering teacher questions, connecting to
prior knowledge, responding to classmates, using visual aids, asking questions, responding
chorally, acting out the text, and making predictions. During the read-aloud sessions, the same
seven students took the majority of turns speaking. However, over half of the students
contributed something out loud to the group during each reading. The percentage of students
contributing tended to increase with each reading, and over three-quarters contributed during the
third reading of the primary text in week two. Only three students in the class did not speak up
at all during the course of the unit. However, even those three students responded chorally at
given times and all students participated in the turn-and-talk strategy. Therefore, the interactive
read-aloud involved all students in the class, although to varying degrees.
Through assessments after the readings of the primary text including ten multiple-choice
questions for the whole group and individual interviews for four students, it was shown that these
students did learn from the text. Comprehension scores increased most dramatically from the
65
pre-test to the first post-test. Scores continues to increase after a second and third reading of the
text, indicating that multiple readings of a text can aid student comprehension.
66
5.0 DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to investigate how teachers can support kindergarteners’
comprehension of informational text through the use of repeated read-alouds within a unit. This
discussion will expand upon findings of this study and consider their implications specifically to
classroom practice and more globally to the field of literacy education.
5.1 MAJOR FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS
This study investigated an intact kindergarten class of twenty-five students who engaged in a
two-week study on the topic of bats that included repeated read-alouds of informational text.
Through observation of the read-aloud events, multiple choice assessments, and interviews, data
was gathered about the process and products of comprehension for this group. These findings, as
presented in the last chapter, suggest interactive read-alouds can be an effective comprehension
activity despite the limitations of the present study.
5.1.1 Major findings
This study resulted in three major findings. First, the students in this kindergarten class utilized a
variety of actions to access the text within the sociocultural context of the informational
67
interactive read-aloud. Second, the students in this classroom were able to demonstrate
comprehension of the text after the interactive read-aloud. Finally, repeated readings of the text
resulted in increased acquisition and retention of concepts from the text.
Studies show that actively involving students in discussion of the text in order to
construct meaning results in better comprehension than merely reading followed by questioning
(McKeown & Beck, 2003; Wiseman, 2011). The results of this study support this assertion.
Specifically, kindergarteners were able to engage directly with the text individually and construct
meaning jointly with the teacher and classmates throughout the read-aloud. Students engaged
with the text individually by connecting to prior knowledge, using visual aids, acting out the text,
and making predictions. They worked cooperatively with the teacher when answering teacher
questions, asking questions, and responding chorally. There were also occasions when the
teacher initiated acting out the text or using visual aids. Students also responded to their
classmates, showing engagement with the text without teacher mediation. This co-construction
between classmates also occurred when turn-and-talk questions were asked. During interviews,
students noted that the turn-and-talk strategy helped them to understand the text better.
Comprehension was evident in scores on the multiple-choice assessment and interviews
after a single reading of the informational text. A pre-test indicated that the subject matter of the
unit was relatively unfamiliar to the students in this class. After one reading of the primary text,
scores on a comprehension assessment improved significantly. Likewise, when interviewed,
students demonstrated that learning occurred during the read-aloud.
Comprehension improved on multiple choice assessments and interviews with repeated
readings of the text. Although there was not a significant difference in scores between the first
and second readings of a text, there was a significant difference in scores from the second to the
68
third. This indicates that reading the text a third time allowed students to understand the text
more deeply and remember important unit concepts. When interviewed, only the student
performing well below grade level in ELA did not demonstrate acquisition and retention of unit
concepts. The other three students showed improvement in comprehension after each reading of
the primary text. They gave more complete responses, and were able to identify text features and
class strategies that helped them to comprehend the text better. They also all expressed positive
opinions toward rereading texts, noting that it helped them to learn more or remember
information better.
5.1.2 Limitations
This study has a number of limitations. One major limitation was the sample size. One intact
classroom of twenty-five students participated. These twenty-five students may not be
representative of other kindergarten classrooms. If these read-alouds were conducted with
another class, other results may have been found. One component of the RAND Reading Study
Group’s comprehension model is the student. For the students in this study, the topic of bats was
of high interest, but prior knowledge was limited. If these factors were different, both process
and products of comprehension that were observed could be different.
Another limitation of this study was the use of multiple-choice questions for assessing
comprehension. Other methods may have given a more complete picture of the learning that
occurred. For example, all students in the class could have been questioned with the interview
protocol. This would have allowed for open ended responses to eliminate guessing and allowed
for students to expand upon answers. Follow up queries could have illuminated understandings
and misconceptions. The time it would take to talk to all of the students made this method
69
impractical. Demonstrating comprehension through post-reading activities was also considered.
Students did complete activities that included writing and drawing after some of the reading
sessions. The quality of the work on these activities was influenced by more than
comprehension of the text. Factors such as language skills related to following direction,
attention to task, and fine motor skill development also played a role. Therefore, using the time
and resources available, assessing through multiple-choice questions was the most feasible.
Finally, using interactive read-alouds as the only instructional strategy was a limitation of
this study. Although this study provided an opportunity for a close look at the nature,
implementation, and impact of interactive read-alouds, it did not offer an opportunity to compare
this strategy with other types of pedagogy. While comprehension did occur, and did increase
with repeated readings of the informational text, it cannot be determined if another strategy
would have been more effective.
5.2 IMPLICATIONS
The results of this study have implications for classroom practice and pedagogy. They also
suggest lines of inquiry to further study practices of comprehension instruction.
5.2.1 Classroom Practice
Read-alouds are common practice in kindergarten classrooms. The selection of texts for these
read-alouds has historically skewed towards narrative texts (Duke, 2000; Yopp & Yopp, 2006).
The structure of the read-aloud event is another factor in comprehension (Brabham & Lynch-
70
Brown, 2002; Hofman, 2011; Varelas & Pappas, 2006). The Initiate, Respond, Evaluate (IRE)
approach to a read-aloud is a traditional and frequently implemented strategy that puts the
control of the text in the hands of the teacher. On the other hand, an interactive read-aloud
invites the students to take part in constructing meaning from the text. The teacher and the
students together engage in conversation to understand the text. In this study, students utilized a
variety of actions to make meaning from the informational text. In other words, when given the
opportunity, kindergarten students take an active role in constructing meaning from the text.
They draw upon their prior knowledge and engage with the teacher and other students to
integrate the new concepts into their understandings.
Considering this study as well as prior research on read-alouds and the use of
informational texts with young students, engaging in interactive read-alouds of informational text
is advisable for kindergarten teachers. This activity allows students to acquire knowledge that
will be beneficial in future content area studies. It allows students to encounter and grapple with
complex text that they are unable to read independently. Repeated readings of an informational
text has also been shown to be beneficial. By incorporating repeated readings into their practice,
teachers can help students develop comprehension skills. These repeated readings also allow
students to delve into a subject in order to comprehend the information on a deeper level. This
practice will benefit students as they engage in close reading of texts in later grades.
Research has demonstrated that interactive read-alouds promote comprehension
(Dickenson & Smith, 1994; Hoffman, 2011; Lennox, 2011), but evidence suggests that teachers
are not employing this strategy regularly in their practice (McKeown and Beck, 2003).
Therefore, training in the design and implementation of interactive read-alouds could benefit
new and veteran teachers alike. This study suggests that preservice teachers could benefit from
71
instruction in text selection, developing questions, and supporting comprehension through
interactive discussions when working with young students. Widespread use of this strategy is
more likely if it is understood and practiced before teachers enter the workforce. There also
seems to be a need for veteran teachers to gain familiarity with this approach. After providing
professional development sessions on how to develop and implement an interactive read-aloud
with informational text, districts could provide teachers with time to develop units that include
this practice. McKeown and Beck (2003) cite the time requirements of developing an interactive
read-aloud as a barrier to implementation. Working collaboratively, teachers would be able to
more efficiently prepare materials. Providing opportunities for reflection after implementation
would promote fidelity of implementation and allow for an iterative cycle of refining and
improving the units. If findings from research are to be put into practice in the classrooms,
districts must be committed to providing the time and resources needed.
5.2.2 Future Lines of inquiry
During the interactive read-aloud, students were guided to think about certain ideas by the
questions posed by the reader. The reader drew attention to text features and visual aids that
could aid comprehension. However, there was no direct instruction in using specific
comprehension strategies. Are there specific comprehension strategies that should be taught to
kindergarten students to aid in comprehension of informational text? How can these strategies
be integrated into an interactive read-aloud to allow students to practice their skills?
As the school librarian, I had to step out of my regular schedule to act as reader for this
unit. Typically, a classroom teacher would develop and teach a unit that includes repeated read-
alouds of informational text. However, a school librarian/ media specialist can play a role in the
72
literacy instruction of primary age students. Therefore, there are implications from this study
related to the practice of school librarians as well as classroom teachers. Interactive read-alouds
can be part of the library routine and give students additional repetition of comprehension
strategies that are practiced in their classroom. The books that are selected to be read during
library class can be related to content area topics that are being studied in the classroom, or have
a literary focus such as character traits that is being learned in the classroom. This study then
suggests the following questions: What role can school librarians take in the literacy instruction
of young students? How can classroom teachers and librarians collaborate to best meet the needs
of young students as they engage with informational text?
This study, like Donovan and Smolkin (2002) and Heisey and Kucan (2010) investigated
a science unit of study. Informational texts that present ideas from other content areas might
present different comprehension challenges. Future inquiries may address the question: How do
kindergarten students engage with a social studies text in the context on an interactive read-
aloud? How do kindergarten students understand mathematical concepts when presented in an
interactive read-aloud?
The ability to comprehend text is crucial. The new Pennsylvania Core Standards has led
to a shift in ELA instruction in the primary grades. Students are expected to be equally
proficient in comprehending informational and narrative texts. Because of these expectations,
comprehension instruction cannot be delayed until the later grades. We need to work to discover
the most effective means for not only teaching the content of units, but the comprehension skills
that students will need to become successful independent readers in the later grades.
73
APPENDIX A
MULTIPLE CHOICE ASSESSMENT
Questions were presented one at a time on the screen. Questions and
answer choices were read aloud. Pictures accompanied answer choices.
Each of the post-tests was given three times. Each time, the same questions
were used, but questions were presented in a different order. Answer choices
were also presented in a different order.
Bats pre-test
1. When are nocturnal animals most active? a. morning b. afternoon c. night
2. Which is true about mammals? a. Mammals have feathers. b. Mammals feed their babies milk.
c. Mammals are cold blooded.
74
3. How is a bat different from other mammals? a. Bats can fly. b. Bats have furry bodies. c. Bats lay eggs.
4. If something is unique, it is a. small b. like other things c. different from other things
5. What body parts are most important for echolocation? a. mouth and ears b. wings and claws c. eyes and nose
6. What do bats probably eat if they use echolocation? a. fruit b. insects c. blood
7. What do bats that eat fruit need? a. good sense of smell b. large ears c. small wings
8. Where might a bat find shelter? a. in a nest b. under a bridge c. under a bush
9. What should a bat shelter be like? a. quiet and hidden b. small and cold c. big and sunny
10. To survive, all animals need air, water, shelter, and ____________. a. tools b. friends c. food
11. What does beneficial mean? a. scary b. small c. helpful
75
12. When do bats migrate? a. when the weather gets cold b. in the daytime c. when it is time to eat
13. What do bats do when they hibernate? a. fly b. eat c. sleep
14. How can micro bats help people? a. They eat harmful insects. b. They can roost under bridges c. They can
migrate.
15. How do fruit bats help plants a. They help spread seeds. b. They protect plants from predators. c. They
are nocturnal.
16. How do bats help farmers? a. They can eat crops. b. They can live in barns. c. Their droppings
can be fertilizer.
17. How do bats stay safe from predators? a. They migrate. b. They roost in high places. c. They use claws to fight.
18. What happens when people clear the rainforest? a. Bats lose their homes. b. Bats cannot hibernate. c. Bats can’t find
water.
19. How could people help bats? a. make and follow laws to protect bats b. pick up bats they find
c. use insect spray
76
20. What is the biggest threat to bats? a. the sun b. snakes c. people
Post-test A
Text #1: Bats by the editors of Time for Kids
1. When are nocturnal animals most active? a. morning b. afternoon c. night
2. Which is true about mammals? a. Mammals have feathers. b. Mammals feed their babies milk. c. Mammals
are cold blooded.
3. How is a bat different from other mammals? a. Bats can fly. b. Bats have furry bodies. c. Bats lay eggs.
4. If something is unique, it is a. small b. like other things c. different from other things
5. What body parts are most important for echolocation? a. mouth and ears b. wings and claws c. eyes and nose
6. What do bats probably eat if they use echolocation? a. fruit b. insects c. blood
7. What do bats who eat fruit need? a. good sense of smell b. large ears c. small wings
77
8. Where might a bat find shelter? a. in a nest b. under a bridge c. under a bush
9. What should a bat shelter be like? a. quiet and hidden b. cold and quiet c. big and sunny
10. To survive, all animals need air, water, shelter, and ____________. a. tools b. friends c. food
Post-test B
Text #2: Bats: Hunters of the Night by Elaine Landau
1. What does beneficial mean? a. scary b. small c. helpful
2. When do bats migrate? a. when the weather gets cold b. in the daytime c. when it is time to eat
3. What do bats do when they hibernate? a. fly b. eat c. sleep
4. How can micro bats help people? a. They eat harmful insects. b. They can roost under bridges
c. They can migrate.
78
5. How do fruit bats help plants a. They help spread seeds. b. They protect plants from predators.
c. They are nocturnal.
6. How do bats help farmers? a. They can eat crops. b. They can live in barns.
c. Their droppings can be fertilizer.
7. How do bats stay safe from predators? a. They migrate. b. They roost in high places. c. They use claws to fight.
8. What happens when people clear the rainforest? a. Bats lose their homes. b. There are no insects to eat. c. Bats can’t find water. 9. How could people help bats?
a. make and follow laws to protect bats b. pick up bats they find c. use insect spray
10. What is the biggest threat to bats? a. the sun b. snakes c. people
79
APPENDIX B
READING ATTITUDE SURVEY
Reading Attitude Survey: Directions for Use
This survey is designed to provide a quick indication of student attitudes toward read-alouds and informational text in general and books about bats in particular.
It is adapted from the Elementary Reading Attitude Survey developed by McKenna & Kear (1990). Permission to use the artwork was granted by Pawsinc. on April 13, 2016.
Administration Begin by telling the students that you wish to find out how they feel about listening to books. Emphasize that this is not a test and there are no right answers.
Distribute the survey and ask them to write their names on the top. Hold up a copy of the survey so that they can see the first page. Point to the Garfield at the far left of the first item. Discuss the mood that Garfield seems to be in (very happy). Then move to the next picture and discuss Garfield’s mood (a little happy). Repeat this for the next two Garfields (a little upset and very upset).
Explain that together you will read some statements about reading and the students should think about their own feelings. They should then circle the picture of Garfield that is closest to their own feelings. (Emphasize they should answer how they feel, not how they think Garfield would feel). Read each item aloud slowly and distinctly two times. Repeat as needed. Ensure that all students are working on the correct item.
80
Scoring
To score the survey, count four points for each leftmost Garfield (happiest), three for each slightly smiling, two for each mildly upset, and one for each very upset.
A composite score can be obtained, or scores on specific items can be combined to indicate attitude toward specific aspects of read-alouds.
Items 1 – 5: attitude toward listening to books in general
Items 6-8, 11: attitude toward informational text
Item 9: attitude toward multiple readings of a text
Items 10 – 12: attitude toward learning about bats (specific content of unit)
81
Name ___________________________________
Please circle the picture that describes how you feel.
1. How do you feel about getting a book for a present?
2. How do you feel about listening to a book at home?
3. How do you feel about listening to different kinds of books?
4. How do you feel about listening to someone read a made-up story?
82
5. How do you feel about listening to a book in school?
8. How do you feel about learning from a book?
6. How do you feel about listening to a book that gives real information?
7. How do you feel when a teacher asks you questions about what you heard in a book?
83
10. How do you feel about learning about the bats?
9. How do you feel about listening to a book that you have already heard?
11. How do you feel about listening to a true book about the bats?
12. How do you feel about listening to a made-up story about the bats?
84
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
I interviewed four kindergarten students six to seven times each. The first interview was
conducted prior to any instruction to gain a baseline for content knowledge and comprehension
strategies. The other interviews were conducted after each of three repeated read-alouds of two
target texts for the unit. The interview was intentionally brief to account for short attention spans
of kindergarten students.
Interview Questions – pre-test:
1. What does nocturnal mean? 2. What does unique mean? 3. What does beneficial mean? 4. How are hibernate and migrate alike and different? 5. What things does a bat need in order to live? How does it get those things? (as needed,
prompt: how can a bat get food, water, shelter) 6. What makes a bat a mammal? How is it different from other mammals? 7. What can you tell me about echolocation? 8. How are bats helpful to people? 9. What are some things that are dangerous for bats? 10. How could people help bats? 11. Is there anything else that you know about bats? 12. What can you do if you are listening to a book and you don’t understand something?
Interview Questions: after first reading of Text #1
1. What does nocturnal mean?
85
2. What does unique mean? 3. What things does a bat need in order to live? How does it get those things? (as needed,
prompt: how can a bat get food, water, shelter) 4. What makes a bat a mammal? How is it different from other mammals? 5. What can you tell me about echolocation? 6. What else did you learn about bats from this book? 7. Is there anything the author did to make it easier/ harder to learn about bats? 8. Is there anything we did as a class that made the book easier to understand?
Interview Questions: after second reading of text #1
1. What does nocturnal mean? 2. What does unique mean? 3. What things does a bat need in order to live? How does it get those things? (as needed,
prompt: how can a bat get food, water, shelter) 4. What makes a bat a mammal? How is it different from other mammals? 5. What can you tell me about echolocation? 6. What else did you learn about bats from this book? 7. Is there anything the author did to make it easier/ harder to learn about bats? 8. Is there anything we did as a class that made the book easier to understand? 9. We have already read this book once. How did you feel about listening to it again?
Interview Questions: after third reading of text #1
1. What does nocturnal mean? 2. What does unique mean? 3. What things does a bat need in order to live? How does it get those things? (as needed,
prompt: how can a bat get food, water, shelter) 4. What makes a bat a mammal? How is it different from other mammals? 5. What can you tell me about echolocation? 6. What else did you learn about bats from this book? 7. Is there anything the author did to make it easier/ harder to learn about bats? 8. Is there anything we did as a class that made the book easier to understand? 9. We have already read this book twice. How did you feel about listening to it again?
Interview Questions: after first reading of text #2
1. What does beneficial mean? 2. How are hibernate and migrate alike? 3. How are bats helpful to people? 4. What are some things that are dangerous for bats? 5. How could people help bats? 6. What else did you learn about bats from this book?
86
7. Is there anything the author did to make it easier/ harder to learn about bats? 8. Is there anything we did as a class that made the book easier to understand?
Interview Questions: after second reading of text #2
1. What does beneficial mean? 2. How are hibernate and migrate alike? 3. How are bats helpful to people? 4. What are some things that are dangerous for bats? 5. How could people help bats? 6. What else did you learn about bats from this book? 7. Is there anything the author did to make it easier/ harder to learn about bats? 8. Is there anything we did as a class that made the book easier to understand? 9. We have already read this book once. How did you feel about listening to it again?
Interview Questions: after third reading of text #2
1. What does beneficial mean? 2. How are hibernate and migrate alike? 3. How are bats helpful to people? 4. What are some things that are dangerous for bats? 5. How could people help bats? 6. What else did you learn about bats from this book? 7. Is there anything the author did to make it easier/ harder to learn about bats? 8. Is there anything we did as a class that made the book easier to understand? 9. We have already read this book twice. How did you feel about listening to it again?
87
APPENDIX D
INFORMATIONAL TEXT SELECTION CHECKLIST
Topic:
Titl
e
Accurate information
Complex Language
Accessible language
Depth of content
Engaging visuals
Illustrations related to text
Info. text features
Content to cover:
88
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Beck, I.L. & McKeown, M.G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read aloud experiences for young children. The Reading Teacher, 55(1), 10-20. Brabham, E.G. & Lynch-Brown, C. (2002). Effects of teachers’ reading-aloud styles on vocabulary acquisition and comprehension of students in the early elementary grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94 (3), 465-473. Carter, B. & Abrahamson, R. (1991). Nonfiction in a read-aloud program. Journal of Reading, 34(8), 638-642. Cassidy, A.M. & Vukelich, C. (1977). The effects of group size on kindergarten children’s
listening comprehension performance. Psychology in the Schools, 14(4). 449-454.
Chinn, C.A., Anderson, R.C., & Waggoner, M.A. (2001). Patterns of Discourse in Two Kinds of Literature Discussion. Reading Research Quarterly, 36 (4), 378-411.
Diamond, A., Barnett, W.S., Thomas, J., & Monro, S. (2007). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318, 1387-1388. Donovan, C. A. & Smolkin, L. B. (2002). Considering genre, content, and visual features in the selection of trade books for science instruction. The Reading Teacher, 55(6), 502-520. Dickinson, D.K. & Smith, M.W. (1994). Long-term effects of preschool teachers’ book readings on low-income children’s vocabulary and story comprehension. Reading Research Quartlerly, 29(2), 104-122. Duke, N.K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: the scarcity of informational texts in first grade.
Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202-224.
Duke, N.K. & Bennett-Armistead, V.S., with Huxley, A., Johnson, M., McLurkin D., Roberts,E., Rosen, C., & Vogel, E. (2013). Reading and writing informational text in the primary grades. New York: Scholastic. Duke, N.K., & Kays, J. (1998). “Can I Say, ‘Once Upon a Time’?”: Kindergarten
89
Children Developing Knowledge of Informational Book Language. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 13(2). 295-318.
Duke, N. & Tower, C. (2004). Nonfiction texts for young readers. In Hoffman, J.V. & Schallert, D.L. (Eds.), The Texts in Elementary Classrooms. (pp. 111-128). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Durkin, D. (1974-75). A six year study of children who learned to read at the age of four. Reading Research Quarterly, 10(1), 9-61.
Durkin, D. (1978). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 481-533.
Foster, W.A., & Miller, M. (2007). Development of the Literacy Achievement Gap: A Longitudinal Study of Kindergarten Through Third Grade. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 173-181. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2007/018).
Hall, K.M., Sabey, B.L., & McClellan, M. (2005). Expository Text Comprehension: Helping
Primary-Grade Teachers Use Expository Texts to Full Advantage. Reading Psychology, 26, 211-234. Doi: 10.1080/02702710590962550
Heisey, N. & Kucan, L. (2010). Introducing science concepts to primary students through read-alouds: Interactions and multiple texts make the difference. The Reading Teacher, 63(8), 666-676. Doi: 10.1598/RT.63.8.5.
Hoffman, J.L. (2011). Coconstructing meaning: Interactive literary discussions in kindergarten read-alouds. The Reading Teacher, 65 (3), 183-194. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.01025
Hoffman, J.L., Collins, M.F., & Schickedanz. (2015). Instructional challenges in developing young children’s science concepts: Using informational text read-alouds. The Reading Teacher, 68 (5), 363-372. Doi: 10.1002/trtr.1325.
Kraemer L., McCabe, P. & Sinatra, R. (2012) The Effects of Read- Alouds of Expository Text on First Graders' Listening Comprehension and Book Choice, Literacy Research and Instruction, 51:2, 165-178, DOI: 10.1080/19388071.2011.557471
Lee, Y. J., Lee, J., Han, M., & Schickedanz, J. A. (2011). Comparison of Preschoolers' Narratives, the Classroom Book Environment, and Teacher Attitudes Toward Literacy Practices in Korea and the United States. Early Education and Development, 22(2), 234- 255.
Lehto, J.E. & Anttila, M. (2003). Listening comprehension in primary level grades two, four, and six. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 133-143. doi: 10.1080/0031383032000047457.
90
Lindo, E. (2014). Family background as a predictor of reading comprehension performance: An examination of the contributions of human, financial, and social capital. Learning and Individual Differences, 32, 287-293.
May, L. (2011). Animating talk and texts: Culturally relevant teacher read-alouds of informational texts. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(1), 3-38. McKeown, M.G., & Beck, I.L. (2003). Taking advantage of read alouds to help children make sense of decontextualized language. In A. van Kleek, S. A. Stahl, and E.B. Bauer (Eds.), Storybook Reading (pp. 159 – 176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Myers, P. A. (2005). The Princess Storyteller, Clara Clarifier, Quincy Questioner,
and the Wizard: Reciprocal teaching adapted for kindergarten students. The Reading Teacher. 59 (4), 314-324. doi:10.1598/RT59.4.2
National Governors Association. (2010). Common core state standards. Light, J, 19, 19. NAEYC. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PSDAP.pdf
Neugbauer, S.R & Curie-Rubin, R. (2009). Read-Alouds in Calcu, Peru: A bilingual indigenous context. The Reading Teacher, 62(5), 396-405. doi: 10.1598/RT.62.5.3.
Packer, M. J., & Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and Constructivist Theories of Learning: Ontology, Not Just Epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35(4), 227-241.
Pearson, P. D. (1985). Changing the face of reading comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher, 38(8), 724-738.
Pearson, P. D., Hansen, J., & Gordon, C. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children's comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Literacy Research, 11(3), 201-209.
Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common core standards the new US intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 103-116. Poveda, D. (2003). Literature socialization in a kindergarten classroom. Journal of Folklore Research, 233-272.
Pressley, M., & Allington, R. L. (2014). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. Guilford Publications.
91
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1982). The Literary Transaction: Evocation and Response. Theory Into Practice, 21(4), 268-77.
Russell, J.L. (2011). From child’s garden to academic press: The role of shifting institutional logics in redefining kindergarten education. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 236-267.
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage. Sandora, C., Beck, I., & McKeown, M. (1999). A comparison of two discussion strategies on
students’ comprehension and interpretation of complex literature. Journal of Reading Psychology, 20, 177-212.
Scarborough, H. S., & Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. Developmental Review, 14, 245–302.
Sipe, L.R. (2008). Storytime: Young Children’s Literary Understanding in the Classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Smolkin, L.B., & Donovan, C.A. (2001). The Contexts of Comprehension: The Information
Book Read Aloud, Comprehension Acquisition, and Comprehension Instruction in a First Grade Classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 102 (2), 97-122.
Smolkin, L.B., & Donovan, C.A. (2003). Supporting Comprehension Acquisition for Emerging
and Struggling Readers: The Interactive Information Book Read-Aloud. Exceptionality, 11(1), 25-38.
Varelas, M. & Pappas, C. (2006). Intertextuality in read-alouds of integrated science-literacy units in urban primary classrooms: Opportunities for the development of thought and language. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 211-259.
Webb, N. L. (2002). Depth-of-knowledge levels for four content areas. Language Arts. Wiseman, A. (2011). Interactive Read Alouds: Teachers and Students Constructing
Knowledge and Literacy Together. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38, 431-438. doi:10.1007/s10643-010-0426-9.
Yopp, R.H., & Yopp, H.K. (2006). Informational texts as read-alouds at school and home. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(1), 37-51.